University of Nebraska at Omaha
DigitalCommons@UNO
Student Work
5-24-1995
The War in the Gulf: Access and Photographic
Coverage During the Crisis
Victor J. Paul
University of Nebraska at Omaha
Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.unomaha.edu/studentwork
Recommended Citation
Paul, Victor J., "The War in the Gulf: Access and Photographic Coverage During the Crisis" (1995). Student Work. 427.
http://digitalcommons.unomaha.edu/studentwork/427
This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by
DigitalCommons@UNO. It has been accepted for inclusion in Student
Work by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@UNO. For
more information, please contact [email protected].
The War in the Gulf:
Access and Photographic Coverage During the Crisis
A Thesis
Presented to the
Department of Communication
and the
Faculty of the Graduate College
University of Nebraska
In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the
Masters of the Arts Degree
University of Nebraska at Omaha
by
Victor J. Paul
Omaha, Nebraska
May 24, 1995
UMI Number: EP73065
All rights reserved
INFORMATION TO ALL USERS
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,
a note will indicate the deletion,
UMT
Dissertation Publishing
UMI EP73065
Published by ProQuest LLC (2015). Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author.
Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC.
All rights reserved. This work is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code
ProQuest:
ProQuest LLC.
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, Ml 48106- 1346
Acceptance Page
Acceptance for the faculty of the Graduate College, University of Nebraska, in
partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Masters of Arts, University of
Nebraska at Omaha.
Committee
Department
Name
C'sdvvxmvAnf? q'VrWv.
^'az<JL
Chairman
Date
Abstract
War is a tragic part of our society. War causes death and destruction not only to losers but also to
the victors. In the age of real time television wars and from the daily bombardment of images from the
battlefield in the media, political and military leaders have learned that fighting lengthy wars is nearly
impossible for a democratic society.
The military, as an institution, is very methodical in its procedures and how it wages war. The
media, as also an institution, publishes and disseminates information to the public on newsworthy events.
By controlling media access to war events, the military can create this particular vision of war to the
American public which, in fact, the military uses to create its own picture of reality.
Photojoumalists have faced many challenges covering war. Whether voluntary or strict, some
form of censorship has been placed on photojoumalists. Photographs of dead or wounded American
soldiers have always been handled with sensitivity. For photojoumalists to gather or record information,
they must have the greatest possible access to events. During times of war, photojoumalists either have not
been allowed access to combat, or they have had unlimited access to the action. Media access to war-time
events has not been given First Amendment protection by the courts.
Since the invasion of Grenada in 1983, the media has been struggling with the military for access
to combat operations. During the War in the Gulf, the media had limited access to the events of the war
because only a handful of journalists and photojoumalists covered the war via a pool system implemented
by the military. This made access a problem.
With the exception, the primary scene and portrayal in photographs taken during the War in the
Gulf, there were statistical differences in the areas of subject(s), and perspective of photographic images
between the air and ground campaign. Of the 1,853 published images, a majority (60.3 percent) were of
"combat related scenes," while 11.6 percent showed "actual combat scenes." Of the seven subjects that
were coded as present or not present, the largest number of photographs, 877 (47.3 percent), showed
American or Coalition weapons, equipment or targets in Iraq. The largest number of photographs with
soldiers present were of American soldiers (873 or 47.1 percent). The photographs that portrayed the
primary subjects showed a "situation depicting soldiers in action, but not in combat" 25.8 percent of the
time. Photographs published during the war showed different perspectives; of these 1,114 (60.1 percent)
showed the subject(s) in a "normal view of people or objects which are identifiable."
During the war, more "actual combat" photographs were taken during the air campaign than the
ground campaign. During the air campaign, most of the images of actual combat included: military
supplied "Nintendo like" cross haired images of bombing targets over Iraq and Kuwait, photographs of
Coalition planes launching on bombing sorties, and images from the battle of Khafji, a Saudi Arabian Kuwaiti border town where Coalition and Iraqi soldiers actually shot at each other. The air campaign
spanned several weeks and produced 1,167 (63.0 percent) of the images; the ground campaign lasted
several days and produced 686 (37.0 percent) of the images. Coverage of the War of the Gulf tended to
favor images from the air campaign.
From the first bombing attacks of Iraq to the Iraqi accepted cease fire, the War in the Gulf lasted
48 days. The overall image of the War in the Gulf was portrayed as a high-tech, mobile operation that
placed no American soldiers in any actual danger. Images of war have given us a visual description that a
battle has taken place and our perceptions of war have been molded around this recent encounter with war.
War has deadly stakes that place people and machines in harm's way. Soldiers do die and bombs do kill
people, but images from the War in the Gulf did not show the reality of war that was shown during World
War II, the Korean War and especially the Vietnam War.
Table of Contents
Acknowledgement................................................................................................................. ii
List of Tables..................................................................................................................... iii
Chapter
I.
Introduction............................................................................................................ 1
........................................
5
II. Literature R eview
The social construction of reality ........................................................
5
The photographic im age.................................................................................. 7
Combat Photography...................................................................................... 10
Challenges photojoumalists have faced covering w a r ....................................14
Photographic images of dead and wounded soldiers ......................................18
Combat photographs and public opinion.......................................................20
History of photographic access during times of w ar....................................... 21
A ccess........................................................................................................... 27
The American law of access............... .......................................................... 29
Legal Challenges During the War in the Gulf................................................. 32
Access during the War in the G u lf.................................................................35
Summary....................................................................................................... 45
III. Methodology.......................................................................................................... 48
Methodology..................................................................................................49
Content Analysis............................................................................................50
IV. Results and Discussion ........................................................................................ 56
Phases of the War in the G u lf........................................................................ 57
Scene...................................................
58
Subject............................................................................................................60
Portrayal ....................................................................................................... 63
Perspective ....................................................................................................65
Photographic image from the War in the Gulf compared to images
from the Vietnam W ar.................................................................................... 66
The overall image of the War in the G u lf.......................................................69
Summary........................................................................................................71
V. Conclusion ............................................................................................................ 72
Access and photographic coverage of the Warin the Gulf .............................72
Conclusion......................................................................................................73
The future of photographic images in the "realtime" media w o rld .................74
Future research ..............................................................................................76
Appendix
1. Research coding materials .................................................................................... 77
2.
Intercoder reliability results .................................................................................. 80
Bibliography ....................................................................................................................... 82
ii
Acknowledgement
During this process, there were a lot of people who assisted me that I would like to acknowledge at
this time. I would like to thank Dr Mike Sherer for his guidance and advice throughout my graduate career
at UNO. You were my mentor and he will always remind me that photographers and photographs have a
place in communication research. I would also like to thank Dr Jeremy Lipschultz and Dr Mark Rousseau
for their support and excellent support as my thesis committee members.
I would also like to thank my family, numerous four legged children, friends and coworkers for
putting up with me during this process. I would especially like to thank the "Thursday lunch-graduate
student support group." Kevin Wameke, Craig Edmundson, Hugh Reilly and Simon Danigole, our lunches
and discussions on issues from comp questions to life in general has bonded us together in friendship. I
would also like to thank Simon for his editorial assistance, because without his help I would have not gotten
this far.
I would also like to recognize Ken and Ruth Cozart. Your love and courage withstood the distant
and thankfully short separation while Ken went to Saudi Arabia with his reserve unit during the War in the
Gulf.
I would like to dedicate this thesis to my family, Vic, Joe Ann and Scott; and to my wife, Linda.
Your love and support got me through the ups and downs of this thesis.
List of Tables
Table
Page
I.
The presentation of the primary scene of the photographs during the
War in the Gulf between the six publications by percent................................... 60
II.
American soldiers present or not present in photographic images
between the air and ground campaign by percent .............................................61
III.
Portrayal of primary subject in photographs during the War in the Gulf
by percen t..........................................................................................................64
IV.
Perspectives of subject(s) during the War in the Gulf by percent.......................66
V.
Comparison of the scene of photographic images between the War in
the Gulf and the Vietnam War by percent .........................................................68
VI.
Comparison of the perspective of subject(s) of images between the War
in the Gulf and the Vietnam War by percent .....................................................69
Chapter I
Introduction
A news photograph is more than a picture that appears in a newspaper or news magazine. It
communicates that something happened, and a photojoumalist was present not only to witness, but to
capture the event on film. A photograph is a nonverbal document containing a message that add substance
to our experience and to our society.
War, a major part of our nation's history, is covered by journalists and photojoumalists for their
newspapers, magazines, radio networks, television networks and cable networks since these media have
existed. Roger Fenton, James Robertson and Charles Langlois were the first photographers to record the
events of the Crimean War.1 Many more photographers and photojoumalists would follow their lead and
record the events of war and conflict on film. From Matthew Brady, who chronicled the Civil War, to the
nameless pool photographers who photographed the War in the Gulf (1991 ),2photojoumalists have been
the witnesses of war. Photojoumalists who cover a war serve as surrogates for those who remain at home.
"The number of journalists who actually witness the violence, danger, bloodshed, and the snafus of combat
is a tiny minority of those who go to cover the war."3
When the troops march off to war, the photojoumalists who follow them take the latest
technological advances in the field of photography with them. It was technologically possible during the
Spanish-American War to publish in newspaper and magazine photographs as half-tone images.4 During
the Vietnam War, it took several hours and sometimes days to retrieve images from the frontlines. Today,
1Phillip Knightley, The First Casualty (New York: Harcourt, Brace Jovanovich, 1975), 15.
2 In this thesis, the War in the Gulf will be used instead of Operation Desert Storm, the Persian Gulf
War, or the the War in the Persian Gulf.
3 John J. Fialka, Hotel Warriors: Covering the Gulf War (Washington D.C.: The Woodrow Wilson
Center Press, 1991), 55. Snafu is military slang for "situation normal all fucked up."
4Daniel D. Mich, "The Rise of Photo-Journalism in the United States," Journalism Quarterly. 24
(September 1947): 204; and Susan Moeller, Shooting War (New York: Basic Books, Inc., 1989), 57.
2
battlefield images can be transmitted via satellite to the photo editors' desks within seconds.
Images of war give us a visual description of where a battle takes place, and they capture the mood
of the times. The photographic history of war and combat is key to understanding the American perception
of war.5 Our society has always been interested in news images and information about war. During the
Civil War, Fletcher Harper, the publisher of Harper's Weekly, found that the public was interested in
wartime images.6 Technologically, photographs were reproduced as line drawings which would be
published in the press. War images published of the Spanish-American War included both sketch artists'
drawing and half-tone photographs. During the circulation drives of the war, "publishers discovered the
power of pictures not just to entertain but to mold public opinion. "7 When the United States entered World
War II, "Life and its fellow photomagazines had whetted the public's appetite for pictures and raised
expectations about both the quality of images and the speed with which they appeared in print. "8 From
Vietnam war images, John Morris observed that, "No matter how powerful the images of war these
photographers have captured, our fascination tends to outweigh our horror."9
The Vietnam War will always be classified as the United States first television war, and combat
images reached into American living rooms.10 The American public was exposed to more images of
soldiers and civilians in actual combat than in any other war because television and print publications
5Moeller, 4.
6Andrea G. Pearson, "Frank Leslie's Illustrated Newspaper and Harper's Weekly: Innovation and
Imitation in Nineteenth-Century American Pictorial Reporting," Journal of Popular Culture 23 (Spring
1990): 82.
7Ken Korbe, Sidney Korbe, and Betsy Brill, Spanish-American War "You Furnish the Pictures. I'll
Furnish the War" from Proceedings of the 72nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Education in
Journalism and Mass Communication, Washington, D.C., 10-13 August 1989, ERIC, ED 310 459, 2.
8Moeller, 181.
9 John G. Morris, "This We Remember: Have Photographers Brought Home the Reality," Harper's
Magazine. September 1972, 78.
10Moeller, 385; and Oscar Patterson III, "Television's Living Room War in Print: Vietnam in the News
Magazines," Journalism Quarterly. 61 (Spring 1984): 35.
3
supplied the American public daily with visual images of the Vietnam War.11 Photojoumalists covering the
Vietnam War had nearly unlimited access to information. By comparison, information access during the
War in the Gulf was very limited just the opposite of the Vietnam experience. Was there a difference in the
newspapers and magazines publication of images between the air and the ground campaign? How does this
image of war compare with the Vietnam image? What overall image or constructed image emerged from
the War in the Gulf?
During the War in the Gulf, higher television news ratings and newspaper sales showed that "the
American public is staying extremely close to the news."12 On the first night of the War in the Gulf,
President George Bush said this military operation would "not be a new Vietnam," and our forces military
"would not fight with one arm tied behind their backs."13
The media were placed under tight ground rules for their war coverage. The military required
media pool arrangements by allowing only a handful of journalists, photojoumalists, and technicians to
cover the war from the battle site, while the rest of the media covered it from the rear. The War in the Gulf
was the first "real time" television war covered by the media live without pictures and sometimes with
pictures from both sides of the conflict.14
Photojoumalists must be present at a scene to record the events on film. With limited or no access
to a battlefield, the visual report of the event is either lost or controlled by the military. During the War in
the Gulf, photojoumalists were placed in pools and were constantly escorted by military public affairs
11 Charlotte Niemeyer, "Recording the Vietnam War: Photographic Coverage in Newsmagazines from
1964 to 1973" (Masters' Thesis, University of Nebraska at Omaha, 1990), 62-63; Patterson, 35; Michael
Sherer, "Comparing Magazine Photos of Vietnam and Korean War," Journalism Quarterly 65:3 (Fall 1988):
755; and Kenrick S. Thompson, and Alfred C. Clarke, "Photographic Imagery and the Vietnam War: An
Unexamined Perspective," Journal of Psychology. 87 (1974): 280-283.
12 The People, the Press and the War in the Gulf: A Special Times Mirror News Interest Index
(Washington D.C.: Times Mirror Center for the People and the Press, 31 January 1991): 1.
13 Stig A. Norstedt, "Ruling by Pooling," in Triumph of the Image: The Media's Wat in the Persian GulfA Global Perspective, ed. Hamid Mowlana, George Gerbner, and Herbert I Schiller (Boulder: Westview
Press, 1992), 118.
14Philip M. Taylor, War and the Media: Propaganda and Persuasion in the Gulf War (Manchester:
Manchester University Press, 1992), 7.
4
officers. Walter Cronkite said, "With a rational censorship system in place, the press should be free to go
where it wants, when it wants, to see, hear, and photograph what it believes is in the public interest."15
During the War in the Gulf, the photo pool was run by photo editors from the Associated Press,
Rueters, Time. Newsweek, and U.S. News and World Report. Donald Mell, the Associated Press photo
editor who coordinated the pool during the ground campaign, said, "There were nights when we had as
many as 180 rolls of film coming in. That means over 6,000 images."16 From these images, the editors
would choose 20 that would become the official photo pool report for that day. These photo editors
selected the images that were presented to the American public.17
This thesis will examine the images of the War in the Gulf that were published in three national
news magazines: Time. Newsweek and U.S. News and World Report, and the three top daily newspapers:
New York Times. Los Angeles Times and The Washington Post.18 The three news magazines were
represented in the photo pool by their photo editors. All three newspapers subscribe to news services from
Associated Press and Rueters, and these news services photo editors were represented in the official photo
pool.
15 Walter Cronkite, "What is There to Hide?" in The Media and The Gulf War, ed. Hedrick Smith,
(Washington, D.C.: Seven Locks Press, 1992), 46.
16Fialka, 37.
17Ibid.
18 Time has a circulation of 4,335,092 magazines according to Ulrich's Plus database. Newsweek has a
circulation of 3,240,131, and U.S. News and World Report has a circulation of 2,307,569 according to
Gale's Directory of Publication and Broadcast Media. (Detroit: Gale Research Inc., 1994). According to
Editor and Publisher International Yearbook. (New York City: Editor and Publisher, 1994), New York
Times has a circulation of 1,141,366, Los Angeles Times has a circulation of 1,089,690, and The
Washington Post has a circulation of 813,908.
Chapter II
Literature Review
War is deadly. It is also the objective photojoumalists cover with their cameras to capture images
of action, danger, death and destruction. The camera brought the exotic and dangerous near. It satisfied a
lust for seeing the action without placing the viewer at home is never in any danger.1 These images provide
a soldiers' perspective of the war. Along with soldiers, photojoumalists are witnesses to the horrors of war.
A photograph may be worth a thousand words, because words cannot begin to describe the brutality of war
that can be captured with a camera.
During the War in the Gulf, photojoumalists were controlled by military ground rules and placed
in pool arrangements. They had limited access to the front lines, the soldiers and the battles. Even when
they were allowed access, photojoumalists were accompanied by military escorts, and they relied on
military messengers to get their film back to their editors in Ryhad, Saudi Arabia. This sometimes took
days. In Ryhad, their images were reviewed by military censors before publication. Access was a major
problem for photojoumalists during the War in the Gulf. By controlling access and reviewing images, the
military could shape the war's perspective presented to the American public.
The Social Construction o f Reality
In their treatise on the social construction of reality, Berger and Luckmann wrote, "The sociology
of knowledge must concern itself with everything that passes for knowledge in society."2 Barnes defined
society as "a distribution of knowledge." He wrote that:
How people act depends upon what they know. Anything that is known may affect how
people act. Therefore, everything that people know is constitutive of their existence as a
1 Susan Moeller, Shooting War (New York: Basic Books, Inc., 1989), 3.
2Peter L. Berger and Thomas Luckmann, The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the
Sociology of Knowledge (New York: Doubleday and Company, Inc., 1966), 13.
6
society.3
The social construction of reality is "a dialectical process in which human beings act both as the
creators and as producers of their social world. "4 In this dialectic process, there is a distinction made
between three types of reality: objective social reality, symbolic social reality and subjective social reality.
Objective reality is apprehended by individuals in a common sense style of everyday life. Symbolic reality
"consists of any form of symbolic expression of objective reality such as art, literature, media contents, or
communication behavior."5 Subjective reality exists "where both objective and symbolic realities serve as
an input for the construction of the individual's own reality."6 White observed that "Knowledge and reality
emerges from a dialectic between objective facts and the subjective interpretation of them."7
According to Lang and Lang, media content falls into symbolic reality:
The press plays a pivotal role in this process of social construction. Most of what people
know about public life reaches them second-hand, which is to say by way of the various
news media. Despite the advent of television, it remains a fact that very little of what
people know of politics is based on direct observation.8
They also postulated that "every communication system, no matter how sophisticated its technological base,
inevitability injects some bias into the picture of reality it presents."9 Information, in the form of stories or
images, flows from journalists and photojoumalists to their perspective audience. These audience members
can either accept or ignore what has been presented to them by the media as reality. Mediated knowledge
3Barry Barnes, The Nature of Power (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1988), 46.
4Akiba A. Cohen, Hanna Adoni, and Charles R. Bantz, Social Conflict and Television News (Newbury
Park: Sage Publications, 1990), 35.
5 Ibid, 35.
6 Ibid.
7 Jon White, Public Relations in the Social Construction of Reality: Theoretical and Practical
Implications of Berger and Luckmann's View of the Social Construction of Reality, from the paper
presented at the 70th Annual Meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass
Communication, San Antonio, Texas, 1-4 August 1987, ERIC, ED 285 189, 9.
8 Gladys Engel Lang and Kurt Lang, Politics and Television: Re-viewed (Beverly Hills: Sage
Publications, 1984), 202.
9 Ibid., 200-201.
7
of this nature depends on what media systems disseminate because no picture replicate the world in its full
complexity.10
Umberson and Henderson wrote that "the social construction of reality paradigm suggests that
social phenomena are defined in a political and social context."11 In any society, some institutions have
more power and authority than others to construct reality. "This power may be political or economic in
nature, or based on specialized expertise, knowledge, and authority."12 Berger and Luckmann observed
that:
Institutions always have history, of which they are products. It is impossible to
understand an institution adequately without an understanding of the historical process in
which it was produced. Institutions also, by the very fact of their existence, control
human conduct by setting up predefined patterns of conduct, which channel it in one
direction as against the many other directions that would be theoretically be possible.13
After the Vietnam War, the American military believed and acted upon the myth that the "Vietnam
War was lost because of the uncensored press coverage."14 President Bush and his advisors generated a
necessity for the War in the Gulf for the American public and American Allies. During Operation Desert
Shield and before the War in the Gulf, the experts decided "what information should be kept from the
public and what information should be released to the public and the media. "15 The Bush Administration
adopted a policy of limiting access to the wartimes events to be reported to American public by the news
media
The Photographic Image
10Ibid., 198.
11Debra Umberson and Kristin Henderson, "The Social Construction of Death in the Gulf War," OmegaJoumal of Death and Dying. 25:1 (1992): 2.
12Ibid.
13Berger and Luckmann, 52.
14 Walter Cronkite, "What is There to Hide?" in The Media and The Gulf War, ed. Hedrick Smith,
(Washington, D.C.: Seven Locks Press, 1992), 45.
15Umberson and Henderson, 3.
We are just beginning to realize the sustaining nature of the photograph.16 The camera has become
extension of our senses that can record events, and many disciplines depend upon the camera to see what
the human eye cannot. Critics point out "the camera's convincing realism is at times more of a mystique
than a reality," and that "the photographic record is true because 'the camera cannot lie.'"17
Despite any discrepancies between reality and the realism of the camera's vision, our knowledge of
the world has changed because photojoumalists' views are edited:
These edited documents often contain a sufficient number of nonverbal truths to allow the
audience to reconstruct schematic reality and to form concepts that have changed social
thinking dramatically, demonstrating the fact-presenting value of the camera.18
Banta and Hinsley wrote, "The photograph remains an ever-changing mirror, reflecting different realities at
each viewing. As our understanding of history and peoples changes, the photographic image offers new
insights into documented subjects and the attitudes of those behind the camera."19 With the passage of
time, we find meanings that transcend the intentions with which an image was originally created.
People use images to communicate, but they also use images to give form to their concepts of
reality. Photographs are representations of reality that are open to interpretation by individuals with
different backgrounds and cultures. Photographs can also be classified as realistic images, objective views
of reality and schematic images. Photographs can attract attention to a particular subject and convey
information to the viewer.J The photographic image can capture a small moment in time, and withinJhat
image, provide a message that effects viewer.
The impact of photographic images relies on the emotions that the viewer brings to the image. An
important element of the photographic image is the viewer's perspective of the image. The viewer
16Melissa Banta, and Curtis M. Hinsley, From Site to Sight: Anthropology. Photography, and the Power
of Imagery (Cambridge: Peabody Museum Press, 1986), 25.
17John Collier Jr. and Malcolm Collier, Visual Anthropology: Photography as a Research Method.
Revised and Expanded Edition, (Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1986), 8.
18Ibid.
19Banta and Hinsley, 25.
9
"constructs a meaning based on experience and expectations."20 These experiences and expectations are
based on the viewer's culture, codes and conventions. Stuart Hall explored the idea of how a photograph
can determine the news. He^concluded that news photos take from and add to "the social stock of
knowledge at hand in any culture," and it "represents a truncated version of this cultural code. "21 News_^_
photos offer themselves as literal visual transcriptions of the real world.-—
Barthes places great emphasis on the connotation of the photographic image. He maintains that
"the reading of the photograph is thus always historical; it depends on the reader's 'knowledge' just as
though it were a matter of real language." Thus, the connotation isolates, records, and structures all the
historical elements of the image, "all the parts of the photographic surface which derive their very
discontinuity from a certain knowledge on the reader's part, or, if one prefers, from the reader's cultural
situation."22 JThe denotative photograph, the literal reality of the-image, "is powerless to alter_political
opinions: no photograph has ever convinced or.refuted anyone, but the photograph can confirm, insofar as„
political consciousness/^^.
Besides political photographs, Barthes also discusses traumatic photographs, which depended on
the certainty that the scene really happened, and the photographer was present to capture it on film. This is
"the mythical definition of denotation." Traumatic photographs of "fire, shipwrecks, catastrophes, violent
deaths, all capture 'from life as lived.'"24 From World War II, striking images includes: the Pearl Harbor
fireball rising behind wrecked planes at the naval air station,25Marines raising the flag on Iwo Jima,26 and
20 Caroline Dow, "Prior Restraint on Photojoumalists," Journalism Quarterly. 64 (Spring 1987): 89.
21 Stuart Flail, "The determinations of news photographs," in The manufacture of news: Deviance, social
problems, and the Media, ed. Stanley Cohen and Jock Young, (Beverly Hills: Sage Publication, 1981), 226227.
22 Roland Barthes, "The Photographic Message," Image-Music-Text, trans. and ed. Stephen Heath (New
York: Hill and Wang, 1977), 27-28.
23 Ibid., 30.
24 Ibid., 30-31.
25 Moeller, 235.
26 Ibid., 20-21.
10
the atomic mushroom cloud over Hiroshima.27 Images from the Vietnam War are still remembered as
symbols of that era:
1) the Buddhist monk immolating himself in 1963, 2) General Loan shooting the Viet
Cong suspect during Tet 1968, 3) a little girl accidentally napalmed by South Vietnamese
planes, 4) the Marine with the Zippo lighter, 5) the armored vehicle leaving the citadel at
Hue with its cargo of wounded U.S. Marines, and 6) the single helicopter perched atop
the U.S. Embassy in Saigon in April 1975.28
Edward Stiechen, the former chief of the Army's photographic section in World War I and head of
the naval aviation's photographic section during World War II,29became convinced that "if a real image of
war could be photographed and presented to the world, it might make a contribution towards ending the
specter of war."30 Moeller wrote, "War photography observes for those who are not in the battle what they
are missing, and reminds those who were what it is was like."31
Combat Photography
Photographers and their editors have directed what the viewing public sees of war ever since
halftone images appeared on the pages of newspapers and magazines:
Photographers make the event. Photographers choose the subjects to take and compose
each shot by cropping out details that detract from the vision of what they want to show.
Editors select those prints that will be seen by the public and frame them on a page. And,
the public rarely recognizes that reality is manipulated through the lens of a camera and
through the layout of a publication.32
McMasters added: "Recording reality cannot guarantee that wars won't be undertaken again, but that they
won't be taken in ignorance."33
27Ibid., 236.
28 Oscar Patterson III, "Television's Living Room War in Print: Vietnam in the News Magazines,"
Journalism Quarterly. 61 (Spring 1984): 35.
29Moeller, 192.
30John G. Morris, "This We Remember," Harper's. 245 (September 1972): 72.
31 Mueller, 3.
32 Ibid., 14.
33Paul McMasters, "The Pentagon and the Press: The War Continues," Newspaper Research Journal.
12:1 (Winter 1991): 2.
11
When American soldiers are sent into combat, Americans turn to the media for quick and
responsible dispatches about the war. The American public first experienced war photographs during the
Civil War. Leslie's Illustrated Newspaper published line drawings of Matthew Brady's photographs from
the war front. However, the first published war photographs appeared in the Illustrated London News
which published Roger Fenton's photographs from the Crimean War (1854-56).34 The Spanish-American
War, despite the small small number of photojoumalists covering it, is regarded as the first war in which
photojournalism had a significant media presence.35
The photojoumalists who covered World War I faced strict censorship, and the press depended
upon military communiques and photographs for the official version of the war.36 The War Department's,
Committee of Public Information refused to release any photographs of destruction, or dead or wounded
American troops that could have a depressing effect upon the American public. The Committee of Public
Information and the censors believed that "because the public is so susceptible to the message of a picture,"
there was a "need of care in selecting those which might undermine that morale."37
When the United States entered World War II, Life magazine had the country clamoring for
images. Life and other magazines "had whetted the public's appetite for pictures and raised expectations
about both the quality of images and the speed with which they appeared in print. "38 Photographs were
also a popular propaganda piece because they embellished what Americans back home believed about war—
that it was dangerous but romantic.39
During the Vietnam War, the American public could watch the war unfold in their living rooms on
television. According to Sherer, "Television, in other words, was forced to sanitize combat photography
34 Daniel D. Mich, "The Rise of Photo-Journalism in the United States," Journalism Quarterly. 24
(September 1947): 202.
35 Moeller, 48.
36 Ibid., 130-131.
37 Ibid., 137.
38 Phillip Knightley, The First Causality (New York: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich, 1975), 315.
39 Moeller, 146.
12
because of audience considerations."40 After examining the photographic portrayals of the Vietnam War by
photojoumalists David Douglas Duncan and Larry Burrows, Thompson and Clarke, said:
I
|
Photographic imagery provides one of the most powerful influences in forming,
changing, and molding publie opinion, since television and photojoumalistic publications
bombarded the public daily with visual stimuli. "41
—
Several research studies examined combat photographs. A few studies have focused on combat
photographs,42readers' reactions to combat photographs,43 and the use of combat photographs as a
propaganda weapon in times of war and peace.44 Edom examined the history of photo-propaganda by
examining combat photos from the Crimean War to World War II.45 Sherer compared combat photos from
the Korean War and the Vietnam War; he found that "the image of war was not the same in both events."
T h e A m g rica n
public was presented images of the brutal side of combat during the Tet Offensive in 1968,
while a more sanitized version of combat images was published during the Korean War.46
Several research studies examined combat photographs from the Vietnam War that were published
40Michael D. Sherer, "Vietnam War Photos and Public Opinion," Journalism Quarterly. 66 (Summer
1989): 392.
41 Kenrick S. Thompson, and Alfred C. Clarke, "Photographic Imagery and the Vietnam War: An
Unexamined Perspective," Journal of Psychology. 87 (1974): 280.
42 These studies examined war photographs. James A. Fosdick, "Photography in War and Peace,"
Journalism Quarterly. 24 (Spring 1947): 227-232; Jack Lule, "Enduring Image of War: Analysis of a Newsweek
Cover," from Proceedings of the 74th Annual Meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass
Communication, Boston, Massachusetts, 7 -10 August 1991, ERIC ED 336 795; Charlotte Niemeyer,
"Recording the Vietnam War: Photographic Coverage in Newsmagazines from 1964 to 1973" (Masters' Thesis,
University of Nebraska at Omaha, 1990), 1-71; Pattersons, 35-39; Michael D. Sherer, "Invasion of Poland
Photos in Four American Newspapers," Journalism Quarterly, 61 (Summer 1984): 422-426; Michael D. Sherer,
"Comparing Magazine Photos of Vietnam and Korean Wars,-" Journalism Quarterly. 65 (Fall 1988): 752-756;
Sherer, "Vietnam War Photos and Public Opinion," 391-395; and Thompson and Clarke, 279-292.
43 Kenrick S. Thompson, Alfred C. Clarke, and Simon Dintz, "Reaction to My-Lai: A Visual-Verbal,"
Sociology and Social Research. 58 (1974): 122-129.
44 Clifton Edom, "Photo-propaganda: The History uf Its Development," Journalism Quarterly. 24 (Spring
1947): 221-226.
45 Ibid.
46 Sherer, "Comparing Magazine Photos of the Vietnam and Korean War," 755-756.
13
in magazines.47 Patterson analyzed three news magazines—Time. Newsweek, and Life—for news stories
and photos from the war. He concluded that the news magazines "tended not to carry an excessive number
of stories with photographs of combat, neither did they provide the American public with a large number of
photographs of the dead, wounded, and dving."48 Sherer's examination ofLcombat.photos and public
opinion found that "as public opinion shifted over time,.so^did the image of war change/^9 Niemeyer
examined combat photos published in three news magazines from August 1964 to August 1973. From her
observations, "It was evident that the image of war did shift before and after the Tet Offensive."50
Three studies examined combat images from the War in the Gulf. Lule examined the Newsweek
cover of the February 4, 1991, which featured the photo of a captured Naval Aviator, Lt. Jeffery Zaun, as he
was shown on Iraqi television.51 Robert Lichter examined televised images of the war, most of which did
not show combat or American military casualties. There were 1,217 individual televised camera shots
showing nonmilitary damage. Of these shots, 48 percent showed damage to civilian areas in Iraq, 23
percent focused on the destruction of Israel, and 13 percent depicted the oil spill in the Persian Gulf.52
Lichter also compared combat visuals that appeared on the nightly news programs. Most of the visual
images depicted the air campaign (594 camera shots from Allied planes) or Patriot missile launches over
Saudi Arabia or Israel. The ground campaign was covered by a total of 404 camera shots.53 John
Newhagen analyzed television news stories for the presence or absence of censorship disclaimer, the
47 Niemeyer, 1-71; Pattersons, 35-39; Sherer, "Comparing Magazine Photos of Vietnam and Korean
Wars,"; and Sherer, "Vietnam War Photos and Public Opinion.,"
48 Patterson, 38.
49 Sherer, "Vietnam War Photos and Public Opinion," 394.
50 Neimeyer, 69.
51 Lule, 158-159.
52Robert Lichter, "The Instant Replay War," in The Media and The Gulf War, ed., Hedrick Smith,
(Washington, D.C.: Seven Locks Press, 1992), 229.
53 Ibid.
14
censoring source, and the producing network.54 One of the focus of this study was television's primary
vehicle for information is the picture, because "television images are rich in emotion-laden, nonverbal
information."55 Newhagen concluded that "Stories that contained disclaimers tended to be more negative,
more intense, and more critical than stories that did not regardless of the producing network."56
Since, several research studies examined combat photography. This thesis will examine the
overall image that emerged from the War in the Gulf and how it was presented in the print media because
these combat images appear on the printed page. The photos were taken by photojoumalists whose
challenges include the media pools and covering the wars.
Challenges photojoumalists havefaced covering war
Photojoumalists covering a war often have their images censored and their presence on the
battlefield restricted. Sometimes censorship is a gentleman's agreement between the military and the
media, there have been instances where censorship was used with dictatorial powers. Military press
censorship has a long history.57 Official military press censorship has a broad continuum, from voluntary
censorship to strict review of images and dispatches from the front lines. Censorship places limits on the
type of images published and it prevents photojoumalists from recording events on film.
Lippmann observed from his World War I experience that "military censorship is the simplest
form of barrier [to public information] but by no means the most important, because it is known to exist,
and is therefore in certain measure agreed to and discounted."58 During World War I, all of the countries in
the war, including the United States, imposed blanket censorship on photographers and journalists, who
54 John E. Newhagen, "The Relationship Between Censorship and the Emotional and Critical Tone of
Television News Coverage of the Persian Gulf War," Journalism Quarterly. 71 (Spring 1991): 32.
55 Ibid., 33.
56 Ibid., 40.
57 Jack A. Gottschalk, "'Consistent with Security'... A History of American Military Press Censorship,"
Communications and the Law. (Summer 1983): 35-36.
58 Murrey Marder, "Operation Washington Shield," Nieman Reports. 45:2 (Summer 1991): 3.
15
were also often banned from the front lines and the rear areas. The rules and guidelines were not always
clear. Jimmy Hare, a photographer, wrote, "To take so much as make a snapshot without official
permission in writing means arrest."59
The underlying principle for this censorship was to prevent the enemy from obtaining useful
information, and photographs were subject to the same type of censorship as print journalism. Photos of
troop movements and materials were censored. Photographers covering the war "were well versed in what
would and what would not pass, and therefore, took and submitted few controversial photographs."60
One of the challenges faced by photojoumalists is government or military guidelines and restraints
used to protect national, military and operational security. The media and the military must try to reach a
compromise between national security and the right of the public to be informed. The military has been
consistent on its need to limit information on exact troop locations, their movements, ship sailings, the exact
number of aircraft or troops, the identification of units being sent overseas and military strategy.61
Historically, the media have been willing to accept the issue of military security, because "information that
may give tactical knowledge to the enemy was reasonably clear-cut."62
Journalists have always conceded a need for operational security and protecting the lives of
American troops. When it comes to the needs of national or military security, there is a fine line between
First Amendment free speech and security, and "security prevails anywhere the military has control of the
actual space."63
As World War II's D-Day approached, the military set four main objectives fot the Allied press
59Moeller, 110.
60Ibid., 114-115.
61 Gottschalk, 38-39; Moeller, 50; and John Pavlik and Seth Rachlin, "On Assignment: A Survey of
Journalists Who Covered the War," The Media at War: The Press and the Persian Gulf Conflict. (New York
City: A Gannett Foundation Report, June 1991), 27.
62 Moeller, 299.
63 Caroline Dow Dykhouse, "Shuttered Shutters: The Photographic Statues and Their Faithful
Companion, 18 USC 1382- An Examination of Photographic Access to Military Areas," 1982, ERIC, ED
218 678, 13.
16
censorship operation: security, speed, consistency, and censorship guidance and assistance to war
correspondents. The governing censorship principle was "that the minimum amount of information will be
withheld from the public consistent with security."64
For Korean War photojoumalists, censorship of still photographs followed the same guidelines
imposed upon other journalists covering the war:
Control should be exercised over the release of photographs rather than taking them, and
photographers are expected, however, to refrain from taking pictures that violate security
or hamper the Armed Forces of their allies in the discharge of military duties.65
Photographs approved for publication were a stamped ("Passed for Publication as Censored") and
initialed on the back of the photo. If photos were required to be censored, portions of the photograph were
either marked out or cut out by the censor. Photographs that were marked "Not to Be Released" were
returned to the photographer's publication "to be filed with the negative as evidence of their censorship
ruling."66
In October 1983, the United States embarked on Operation Fury in Grenada to rescue American
medical students and to help restore a democratic government. The media was barred from joining troops
during the mission. Admiral Wesley McDonald, commander-in-chief of the Atlantic fleet, explained:
Media participation in the operation was restricted initially based on the military
assessment of the importance that the element of surprise played in the successful
execution of the mission and the consideration of the lives of both hostages and
servicemen involved in the operation.67
During Operation Desert Shield, from August 1990 to January 1991, the military began working
on restrictions or guidelines for journalists covering the war while "maintaining operational security
necessary to assure tactical surprise and save American lives."68 The rules were also designed to stop
64 Gottschalk, 43.
65Moeller, 280.
66 Ibid.
67 "Experts from the Defendant's (Pentagon) Lawsuit Brief," in The Media and The Gulf War, ed.
Hedrick Smith (Washington, D.C., Seven Locks Press, 1992), 398-399.
68Pete Williams, "Statement Before the U.S. Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs," in The
Media and The Gulf War, ed. Hedrick Smith, (Washington, D.C.: Seven Locks Press, 1992), 37.
17
images of dead or wounded American soldiers from reaching relatives back home through media channels.
Nohrstedt points out from his observation of the War in the Gulf, that "every crisis situation involves
critical judgements about the balance between the democratic right of information and security interest.1,69
Improvements in photographic technology raised additional censorship problems for
photojoumalists.70 For example, during the Vietnam War, it took hours or days for film and photographs to
reach the United States for broadcast or publication. With the improvement of satellite communications, it
was possible during the War in the Gulf to transmit images and audio in real time. Gerbner speaks of
"instant history."
Instant history is made when access to video-satellite-computer systems blankets the
world in real time with selected images that provoke immediate reactions, influence the
outcome, and quick freeze into received history.71
Reporting instantaneous information around the world presents a twofold problem. First, the
possibility for instantaneous coverage of the battlefield is a tough issue. U.S. Marine General Walter E.
Boomer said, "We worry about the enemy seeing in real time what we're doing."72 The second problem
relies on the journalists in the field. They have the potential to spread information around the world
instantaneously from the war zone. This places more responsibility on the journalists in the field to verify
and check information before reporting live form the battlefield.73
The multinational nature of Coalition forces in the War in the Gulf, however, made it impossible to
deny access to the region. The British military allowed their pool reporters to use satellite phones and
69 Stig A. Nohrstedt, "Ruling by Pooling," in Triumph of the Image: The Media's War in the Persian
Gulf-A Global Perspective, ed. Hamid Mowlana, George Gerbner, and Herbert I Schiller, (Boulder:
Westview Press, 1992), 120.
70 Derrick Mercer, Geoff Mungham, and Kevin Williams, The Fog of War: The Media on the
Battlefield (London: Heinemann, 1987), 214, and Moeller, 5.
71 George Gerbner, "Persian Gulf War, the Movie," in Triumph of the Image: The Media's War in the
Persian Gulf-A Global Perspective, ed. Hamid Mowlana, George Gerbner, and Herbert I. Schiller,
(Boulder: Westview Press, 1992), 244-245.
72John J. Fialka, Hotel Warriors: Covering the Gulf War (Washington, D.C.: The Woodrow Wilson
Center Press: 1991), 62.
73Philip M. Taylor, War and the Media: Propaganda and Persuasion in the Gulf War (Manchester:
Manchester University Press, 1992), 38.
18
satellite broadcasting equipment, which enabled British pool reports to get back to London more quickly
than their American counterparts.74 American journalists were not allowed by the military to operate
satellite equipment, which caused their reports to be delayed for several hours or even days. This forced
American broadcasting companies to use British pool reports from the ground campaign.75
With the development of communication technologies, the media brought the world closer
together. The War in the Gulf was fought half-way around the globe, and the American public was able to
watch it on their television sets in real time. The military can place strict guidelines and limit movement of
the media covering the war, and this includes tight control on the release of photographic images of dead
and wounded soldiers.
Photographic Images o f Dead and Wounded Soldiers
During war, images of dead and wounded American soldiers have to be handled with sensitivity.
During the Crimean War, Roger Fenton went to the Crimea to record the happenings with his camera. In
the valley of the charge of the Light Brigade, he saw bodies covering the battlefield. He did not take out his
camera because he knew that this was not the type of photograph he should take.76
At the beginning of World War II, "one could publish photographs of the enemy or even the Allied
dead . . .," but not of American soldiers.77 In mid-1943, President Roosevelt, the military, and the War
Department reversed their policy on images of dead and wounded soldiers. "American soldiers could be
shown bleeding, dying, and dead in the picture press."78 However, the censors made certain that the dead or
injured soldiers could not be identified. "No one could say after looking at one of these photographs,
That's my boy."’79
74 Fialka, 63.
75 Taylor, 51.
76Knightley, 15.
77Moeller, 204.
78 Ibid., 205.
79 Ibid.
19
During the Vietnam War, the militaiy released guidelines on combat photography. After
discussing the sensitivity of the issue and the concern for the next of kin, the guideline stated:
There has been no effort to impose restrictions on movement of audiovisual
correspondents in the field or to require in-country processing, review and editing of
audiovisual material produced by accredited correspondents. We hope to preserve these
freedoms and ask that correspondents cooperate bya. Not taking close-up pictures of casualties that show faces or anything else that
will identify the individual.
b. Not interviewing or recording the voices of casualties until a medical officer
determines that the man is physically and mentally able, and the individual gives
on
permission.
After Vietnam, the military stated that casualty information was extremely sensitive. An Army
regulation regarding photographing and recording personnel in hostile areas was revised on July 15, 1979:
"Care must be used in releasing information, photographs, and recordings of U.S. personnel and Allied
forces killed, wounded in action, hospitalized, detained as a result of hostile action, or missing in action."81
The regulation prohibited photographs or recordings of recognizable wounded or dead personnel not
identified by name; recognizable wounded personnel identified by name (until next of kin had been
notified, unless the release was approved by the wounded); recognizable wounded personnel who had
requested that their next of kin not be notified; surgical or other major medical care photographs or
videotape recordings which identified the patient; deceased and/or wounded personnel in large numbers;
mangled bodies, obvious expressions of agony, or expressions of severe shock; and personnel missing in
action or detained before next of kin had been identified and search-and-rescue operations had been
terminated.82
Before the War in the Gulf, the military was concerned with the privacy of wounded or dead
soldiers’ families. There have been instances where next of kin have learned about the death of a loved one
through the media. Notification of the next of kin far outweighs the newsworthiness of the image, and
"casualty photographs showing recognizable faces, name tags, or other identifying features should not be
80 U.S. Senate, Committee on Foreign Relations, New Policy in Vietnam. 74-75, quoted in Moeller,
365.
81 Dykhouse, 53.
82 Ibid.
20
used before the next of kin have been notified."83
Images of dead or wounded soldiers published in the media has a broad continuum ranging from
no images of dead and wounded to images of dead and wounded soldiers in Vietnam. It has been argued
that these images could have a depressing effect upon the public. While public opinion polls taken during
the War in the Gulf showed that a majority of Americans supported military involvement, "this percentage
dropped substantially when survey questions included reference to the deaths of American soldiers."84
Combat Photographs and Public Opinion
Our society craved images from war even before photographs could be published. During the
Civil War, Frank Leslie's Illustrated Newspaper and Harper's Weekly found that "images of the [Civil] war
were particularly intriguing" to the public, and both publications' circulations soared.85 Images of war have
an impact on public opinion. According to Umberson and Henderson, "political and military advisors are
well aware of the link between death awareness and public support for wars."86
Photographs of American flags and yellow ribbons have been symbols of challenge, unity and
strength. In past wars, the military and the government have censored images that would greatly affect the
morale back home. Thompson and Clarke stated that "photographic imagery provides one of the most
powerful influences in forming, changing, and molding public opinion, since television and
photojoumalistic publications bombarded the public daily with visual stimuli."87
Recently, the Clinton Administration found that photographic and television images shaped public
opinion against the military's involvement in Somalia. In a botched raid against warlord Mohammed Farah
Aidid, U.S. Rangers were trapped and battling Aidid's men from rooftops and buildings. After the smoke
83 "Operation Desert Shield Ground Rules and Supplementary Guidelines," The Media at War: The Press
and the Persian Gulf Conflict (New York City: A Gannett Foundation Report, 1991) 99.
84 Umberson and Henderson, 3.
85Andrea G. Pearson, "Frank Leslie's Illustrated Newspaper and Harper's Weekly: Innovation and
Imitation in Nineteenth-Century American Pictorial Reporting," Journal of Popular Culture. 23:4 (Spring
1990), 92.
86 Umberson and Henderson, 3.
87 Thompson and Clarke, 280.
21
cleared, 15 American soldiers were killed, 77 were wounded, four were missing in action and one was
taken captive.88 Americans were stunned as television aired footage and newspapers ran photos of Somalis
dragging the body of a dead U.S. soldier through the streets.89 Chief Warrant Officer Michael Durant, who
was taken captive after his helicopter was shot down, was videotaped by his captors answering questions.
As television viewers watched Durant being interviewed, his battered and bloodied face became the
symbolic image of the United States' involvement in Somalia.
After seeing the images from Somalia, Americans called upon their representatives in Washington
to withdraw the U.S. troops. Members of Congress referred to the images and called upon President
Clinton to bring the troops home immediately. National Security Advisor Anthony Lake said that "the
photographs made the president 'very angry."190 Ironically, it was just 10 months earlier that images
invoked the Bush Administration to send U.S. troops to Somalia to help feed the starving Somali people.
With images of dead and captured soldiers, the public's opinion was swayed to recall our troops from the
region. R. W. Apple, the New York Times Washington Bureau Chief, said the "journalism of images has
always had a tremendQusJmpact upon public opinion, and public opinion has always had a tremendous
impact on government."91 Philip Taylor remarked that "Politicians no longer set the agenda—television
images dictated it for them."92
History o f Photographic Access During Times o f War
The Spanish-American War "was the first time that photographs of a major news event were
published . .
and "subsequent news events would be covered by the evolving technology of
88Louise Leif and Bruce B. Auster with Todd Shields and Sam Kiley, "What went wrong in Somalia?"
U.S. News and World Reports. 18 October 1994, 34.
89 Jacqueline Sharkey, "When Pictures Drive Foreign Policy," American Journalism Review. December
1993, 14.
90 Ibid.
91 Ibid., 16.
92 Taylor, 15.
22
photography."93 General William Shafter, commander of the U.S. Army's expedition to Cuba, was hostile
to the press, "yet he permitted them extraordinaiy access to the land operations."94 The photographs of the
war could not capture the totality of combat, but "it was the first war in which the United States fought that
photographs were taken showing action during battle."95
When the United States entered World War I, the American Expeditionary Force was under the
command of General John J. Pershing. Pershing did not allow American correspondents to have open
access to military operations. He restricted coverage of the war by limiting the number of accredited
correspondents to 31 and barring them travel to the front lines.96 When the United States entered the war,
the only authorized photographs of American forces were to be taken by the Army Signal Corps. Only
accredited photographers were allowed to take images in the American zone. Those who were found taking
images of forbidden subjects were severely disciplined.97 Many military operations were closed to the
press. The press had to rely upon the military version of the events, including photographs supplied to them
by the Army.98
During World War II, President Roosevelt—through an executive order—established the United
States Office of Censorship. The Office of Censorship distributed the "Code of Wartime Practices for the
American Press" which "concerned itself with what could be printed, not how that information could be
gathered."99 The censorship office "did not attempt to censor or restrict the access of the U.S. press to the
93 Ken Korbe, Sidney Korbe, and Betsy Brill, Spanish-American War 11You Furnish the Pictures. I'll
Furnish the War" from Proceedings of the 72nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Education in
Journalism and Mass Communication, Washington, D.C., 10-13 August 1989), ERIC, ED 310 459, 28.
94 Moeller, 49.
95 Ibid., 58.
96 "Excerpts from the Defendant's (Pentagon) Lawsuit Brief," 397.
97Moeller, 111.
98 Ibid., 131.
99 Major General Herbert Sparrow, U.S. Army (retired), "The Military Versus the Media," in The Media and
The Gulf War, ed. Hedrick Smith, (Washington, D.C.: Seven Locks Press, 1992), 67.
23
battlefield."100 The Associated Press' Don Whitehead, who covered several beach landings in the Pacific
theater, was told by the commander of an assault unit:
We are ready to help you . . . The people at home won't know what is happening unless
you are given information, and I want them to know . . . If you're wounded, we'll take
care of you. If you're killed we'll bury you.101
Photojoumalists and correspondents suffered three main problems during World War II:
transportation, communication and censorship.102 Transportation to the front lines was critical. It was up to
the photographers and reporters to get to the fighting. Once they arrived, they would have to find some
way of getting their images and stories back to the United States.
Communication between the fronts and the states was a giant hurdle. Because of the distance,
photographers rarely saw their own work once it was processed and published. Moeller said, "They took
pictures in a creative vacuum."103 Photographers and correspondents were always trying to get their images
and stories back to their newsrooms while the news was still newsworthy.
In World War II, military censorship was handled differently, depending on if it was domestic
information, if it was information from both the Pacific and Atlantic theaters of operation, or if it was naval
information. President Franklin Roosevelt requested that the American news media voluntarily respect the
censorship guidelines issued earlier, and he created the Office of Censorship under Byron Price, the former
executive news editor of the Associated Press. Price's office dealt with censorship of all modes of domestic
communication.104
With the war in the Pacific raging on, General MacArthur engaged in dictatorial censorship. His
restrictive news media policy included "multiple censorship of correspondents' copy before release,"105 "use
100 Ibid.
101 Ibid.
102Moeller, 184.
103 Ibid., 187.
104 Gottschalk, 39-40, and Knightley, 275.
105 Gottschalk, 40.
24
of censorship for 'image building,"'106and "the policy of delaying the news and then compounding the
belated release by linking bad news with stories of combat success."107
In the Atlantic theater, the British and American representatives completed an agreement for joint
censorship, which was housed at the British Ministry of Information. Under their large-scale task, this
agreement consisted of creating censorship teams composed of military officers from both countries. These
teams went ashore with invasion landing forces and accredited war correspondents and photojoumalists
during the invasion campaigns of North Africa, southern Europe, and D-Day. Before the D-Day invasion,
the Joint Press Censorship Group composed four objectives of field censorship: "security, speed,
consistency, and censorship guidance and assistance to war correspondents." This guidance established the
principle of field press censorship: "that the minimum amount of information will be withheld from the
public consistent with security."108
The United States' naval censorship was rigid in both theaters of operation. But in the Pacific
theater, censorship remained rigidly effective throughout the war. The Navy found it easier to censor and
control correspondents aboard warships, because "they are limited in their movement, contacts, and
communications, and can only report what they are told by a command that frequently does not have the
frill story itself."109
Logistical problems limited the access of journalists and photojoumalists to major battles in World
War II. The major photo agencies (Associated Press, Acme, International News Photo and Life magazine)
created a photographic pool in early 1942. Under this arrangement, the agencies pooled their resources by
"supplying photographers for the war fronts from the staffs of all four organizations, whose pictures were
then available to all four."110
106Knightley, 281.
107 Gottschalk, 40.
108Ibid., 41-43.
109 Ibid., 41.
110 "Excerpts from the Defendant's (Pentagon) Lawsuit Brief," 398.
25
Photographic coverage from the Korean War was different from World War II because more
photojoumalists covered the events in Korea. Competition between photojoumalists and journalists was
keen. The absence of pool arrangement meant that eveiyone was trying to scoop the opposition.
At the beginning of the Korean War, General Douglas MacArthur tried to avoid formal censorship
by using a voluntary press code. It did not work. After six months of chaos, official censorship was
imposed on the press. The censorship of still images followed the same guidelines imposed on
photojoumalists during World War II. The guidelines said that "control should be exercised over the
release of photographs rather than the taking of them."111
During the Vietnam War, one of the least popular in America's history, the media had wide and
unrestricted access to the battlefield. General Peter Dawkins said, "War is an ugly, dirty, obscene business,
and if you take snippets of it and constantly expose the American public to its reality, that is going to
profoundly influence their attitude towards the enterprise. "112 The media were given ground rules which
met the "military needs for operational security and safety of troops, and at the same time the needs of the
press."113
During the Vietnam War, journalists and photojoumalists accompanied troops and naval units
during operations. The official U.S. policy "was to provide military transportation for reporters to help
them to visit combat and other areas."114 By using helicopter transportation, journalists were more mobile
than their counterparts had been in any other war.
Several years later, the Reagan administration and the military watched with admiration as the
British controlled the media during the Falklands War of 1982. The Falklands War was "the most
111 Moeller, 280.
112Ibid., 363-365.
113 "Excerpts form the Plaintiffs (Press) Lawsuit Brief," in The Media and The Gulf War, ed. Hedrick
Smith (Washington, D.C., Seven Locks Press, 1992), 392.
114 Sparrow, 68.
26
unphotographed war since the Crimean."115 This new military strategy on press restrictions was simple:
"Keep the media as far away from war activities as possible for as long as possible, and put maximum
restrictions on their working conditions."116
In October 1983, the media faced total exclusion from the invasion of Grenada until the fighting
was over. No television photographers were allowed to cover the invasion.117 This was the beginning of
the end of open access to military operations.118
After the military news blackout during the invasion in Grenada, a directive from Caspar
Weinberger, the Secretary of Defense, established "press access to all tuture United States military
operations."119 The Sidle Panel, under the direction of Major General Winant Sidle, consisted of a
12-member panel of former journalists, journalism professors and military public affairs officers. It worked
out a plan for the news coverage of future military operations.120
The Sidle commission recommended the creation of the Department of Defense National Media
Pool. This media pool would be a rotating list of journalists, photojoumalists and technicians who would
cover the early stages of military operations on short notice. The pool would enable the media to cover the
early stages of the operation in a remote area, "while still protecting the element of surprise, an essential
part of what military call operational security."121
The first use of the national media pool in combat conditions came during Operation Just Cause,
115 Edourado Bellando, War Coverage: The Case of the Falklands. from the Freedom of Information Center
Report #494, 4 1984, ERIC ED 246 470.
116Rune Ottosen, "Truth: The First Victim of War?" in Triumph of the Image: The Media's War in the
Persian Gulf-A Global Perspective, ed. Hamid Mowlana, George Gerbner, and Herbert I Schiller, (Boulder:
Westview Press, 1992), 137.
117Nohrstedt, 119.
118 Sydney H. Schanberg, "Censoring for Political Security," in The Media and The Gulf War, ed.
Hedrick Smith, (Washington, D.C.: Seven Locks Press, 1992), 55.
119 "Excerpts from the Plaintiffs (Press) Lawsuit Brief," 393.
120MacArthur, 142.
121 Williams, 35.
27
the invasion of Panama on December 20, 1989.122 The Pentagon delayed the departure of the pool until just
two hours before the fighting began. When the media pool arrived in Panama, the journalists were kept at
Howard Air Force Base for five hours. During this delay, "the media missed the heaviest action of the
operation."123 The pool was not able to get any accounts or photographs of the destruction of the
Panamanian barrio of El Chorrillo in Panama City. This is where General Manuel Noriega's headquarters
were located, or of the Panamanian civilians killed in the invasion.124
From war to war, photojoumalists access ranged from open access to no access to the world's
battlefields. Experienced combat photojoumalist, David Duncan said, he had "no war-photography
philosophy. . . except keep down—and move in close."125 To capture the reality of war and, to record it on
film or video, the photojoumalists must be with the fighting.
Access
In our democratic society, the role of the media is to inform the public about the happenings
necessary to self-government, and to act as a catalyst for public debate on important issues affecting our
society. An important element of publishing and broadcasting the news is newsgathering. Journalists and
photojoumalists need access to an event to gather and record information. In the newsgathering process,
the media must have the greatest possible access. According to Barry Zorthian, open access "fulfills its (the
media's) role as an independent observer and surrogate for the public."126
When it comes to a crisis such as war, the media can respond very quickly to cover the story.
With technological advances such as portable satellite dishes and telephones, the media can relay
information back to their newsrooms from anywhere in the world. According to Taylor, "this only [makes]
122 "Excerpts from the Defendant's (Pentagon) Lawsuit Brief," 399.
123MacArthur, 143.
124Douglas Kellner, The Persian Gulf TV War (Boulder. Westview Press, 1992), 81.
125Moeller, 285.
126Barry Zorthian, "Statement Before the U.S. Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs," in The
Media and The Gulf War, ed. Hedrick Smith, (Washington, D.C.: Seven Locks Press, 1992), 102.
28
it all the more important for the military to ensure a tighter rein over their movements and activities."127
The military and the government have learned that they can manage the media during wartime.
During the Falklands War, the British military used the following rules to manage the media during the war:
Control access to the fighting; control all communication's facilities; exclude neutral
correspondents; carefully screen your own; ban or delay all pictorial coverage, it has too
much impact, in particular, ban live TV; check all the materials the journalists have
gathered; censor, delay or suppress dangerous news; release bad news in dribs and drabs,
so as to reduce its impact; play favoritism and reward patriotic reporters; and, blame
'technical reasons,' it is an excellent excuse in a lot of circumstances.128
In Deciding What's News. Hebert Gans writes, "At the national level, power is generally exercised by
refusing access and is the primary form of censorship."129
As part of its accountability to the American public, the military should provide as much official
information as possible in an accurate, candid, timely and complete manner.130 It is equally important for
the media to perform as an independent representative of the public to check the accountability of the
government and the military's accuracy and validity.131 The military has a right to protect information on
tactical security that accomplishes its military mission. It needs to control access and place restrictions on
the media during times of war. The public also has a right to know what is occurring during the war.
During the War in the Gulf, The Economist, while defending the military's restrictions and
guidelines, stated:
A dutiful press that merely regurgitates what it is told is useless, in the field and at home.
The job of the press is to tell the truth, about right and wrong alike. Such reports can
force improvements and save lives .. ,132
Walter Cronkite argued that:
127 Taylor, 26.
128Bellando, 6.
129Hebert J. Gans, Deciding What's News: A Study of CBS Evening News. NBC Nightly News.
Newsweek, and Time fNew York: Vintage Books, 1979), 120.
130Zorthian, 102.
131 Middleton and Chamberlin, 43-44.
132 Taylor, 272-273.
29
The greatest mistake of our militaiy so far is its attempt to control coverage by assigning
a few pool reporters and photographers to be taken to locations determined by the
military with supervising officers monitoring all their conversations with the troops in the
field. An American citizen is entitled to ask: 'What are they trying to hide?' The answer
might be casualties from shelling, collapsing morale, disaffection, insurrection,
incompetent officers, poorly trained troops, malfunctioning equipment, widespread
illness—who knows? But the fact that we don't know, the fact that the military apparently
feels there is something it must hide, can only lead eventually to a breakdown in homefront confidence and the very echoes from Vietnam that the Pentagon fears the most.133
In the television age, many politicians believe that fighting lengthy wars is nearly impossible for a
i
democratic society. Television can bring a war home nightly to the living room in living color, and when
the scenes become gruesome, "public support for war vanishes."134
The American Law o f Access
Under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, freedom of the press protects the media's
right to publish newsworthy information for public dissemination. Obtaining access to events and resources
has always been a part of the ingenuity of the media. In the Information Age, emerging technologies have
opened new avenues of media coverage of events or crises. The use of computers and satellites raises new
issues in access, censorship and the First Amendment.135 Although the First and Fourteenth Amendments
bar government from interfering with a free press, the Constitution does not "require government to accord
the press special access to information not shared by members of the public generally."136
There are several federal statutes and regulations that govern the relationship between
photojoumalists and the militaiy. Some of these statutes "prohibit photography of defense installations and
equipment and the trespass statute," and "prohibit entry to a closed post."137 Photojoumalists need
133 Walter Cronkite, "What is There to Hide?," The Media and The Gulf War, ed. Hedrick Smith,
(Washington, D.C.: Seven Locks Press, 1992), 47.
134Doris A. Graber, Mass Media and American Politics (Washington, D.C.: CQ Press, 1989), 347.
135 Donna A. Dcmac, Liberty Denied: The Current Rise of Censorship in America (New York: PEN
American Center, 1988), 162-163.
136 "Experts from the Plaintiffs (Press) Lawsuit Brief," 396.
137Dykhouse cites 50 USC 781-85, 18 USC 795-97 and 18 USC 1382, 2.
30
permission of the person in charge of a military area to take pictures within.138 There are specific
regulations that deal with combat areas and to prohibit photographing or recording wounded or dead
military personnel. '"Establishment and Conduct of Field Press Censorship in Combat Areas' which
outlines regulations governing overseas correspondents and the censorship requirements of photography,
television and radio broadcast in combat areas."139
The freedom of the press means little if information cannot be obtained. The news media's First
Amendment rights to gather information have been reviewed by the United States Supreme Court.140 In
1965, the Court upheld the State Department's ban on travel to Cuba. The Court held that neither citizens
nor the media have a First Amendment right to gather information. In the Court's words, "The right to
speak and publish does not carry with it unrestrained right to gather information. "141 In 1972, the Court
addressed the issue of a reporter's right to refuse to reveal confidential sources before a grand juiy.142
It has generally been held that the First Amendment does not guarantee the press a
constitutional right of special access to information not available to the public
generally.143
The current principles governing access flow from two cases decided by the Supreme Court on the
same issue on the same day in 1974. In the first decision, Procunier v. Pell, reporters claimed a First
Amendment right to interview specific prisoners in California jails. Prison officials, however, "believed
that the media attention given to a few prisoners turned them into media celebrities."144 The Court decided
that the prison regulations did not abridge the right of a free press:
The First and Fourteenth Amendments bar government from interfering in any way with a
138 Caroline Dow, "Prior Restraint on Photojoumalists," Journalism Quarterly. 64 (Spring 1987): 88.
139Dykhouse cites under Army Regulation 360-65, OPNAV 5530-3A and Air Force Regulation 190-11
issued in April 1966 and revised on July 15, 1979, 44.
140 Graber, 122.
141 Zemel v. Rusk, 381 U.S. 1,17 (1965).
142Branzburg v. Hayes, 408 U.S. 665 (1972).
143 Id.at 684.
144Procunier v. Pell, 417 U.S. 817, 818 (1974).
31
free press. The Constitution does not, however, require government to accord the press
special access to information not shared by members of the public generally.145
In the second case, Saxbe v. Washington Post, the Court upheld the constitutionality of a federal prison rule
that prohibited interviews of "individually designated" prison inmates.146
For the court to recognize such a special status for the press, however, would have been
to depart from the highly individualistic tradition of contemporary First Amendment
jurisprudence.147
Another case decided by the Supreme Court involved media access and law enforcement officials.
In 1975, KQED, a public television station in San Francisco, California, learned of a suicide that had taken
place in the Alameda County jail. The television station sought access from Sheriff Thomas Houchins to a
portion of the Santa Rita jail, known as the Greystone section, where the inmate had committed suicide.
When permission was denied by the sheriff, KQED with the Alameda and Oakland Branches of the
National Association for the Advancement of Colored People filed a suit arguing that its First Amendment
rights had been violated by the denial of access to the facility.148 The Court upheld the restrictions imposed
on jail visits by Houchins. With Chief Justice Burger wrote the Court opinion that said the First
Amendment does not guarantee "a right of access to all sources of information within governmental
control."149 This same control has been applied to military bases.
The Supreme Court recognized the nonpublic nature of military activities in a 1961 decision that
held "the control of access to a military base is clearly within constitutional power granted to both Congress
and the President."150
The business of a military installation like Fort Dix [is] to train soldiers, not to provide a
public forum. A necessary concomitant of the basic function of a military installation has
been "the historically unquestioned power of [its] commanding officer summarily to
145 Id. at 834.
146 Saxbe v. Washington Post, 417 U.S. 843 (1974).
147Rodney A. Smolla, Free Speech in an Open Society (New York: Vintage Books, 1992), 298.
148Houchins v. KQED, 438 U.S. 1,3-4 (1978).
149Id. at 9.
150Accord, Cafeteria Workers v. McElroy, 367 U.S. 886, 890 (1961).
32
exclude civilians from his area of command.151
The right of access to information, news and images is a fundamental First Amendment issue. The
concept of a First Amendment right of access to a courtroom, established in Richmond Newspapers v.
Virginia and Globe Newspaper Co. v. Superior Court, is based on the concept that "the American people
have a fundamental right to information about the activities of their government."152 When there is a basic
confrontation between the First Amendment and a question of national security, the information in question
must be examined to determine if there would be a "grave and irreparable injuiy to the public interest" if it
was released.153 Although the public has a right to know what the government is doing, national security
interests often take precedence and proscribe access to military actions.
Legal Challenges During the War in the G uy
There were three lawsuits that contested the military restrictions on the media. On Januaiy 10,
1991, during Operation Desert Shield, a lawsuit was filed by the Center of Constitutional Rights on behalf
of several writers, magazines and news organizations. The lawsuit charged that the military restrictions,
placed on the media's access to the war, violated the First Amendment.154 The suit argued that the military
guidelines "interfered for no legitimate reason with their [the media's] ability to gather news and that the
censorship scheme constituted an unconstitutional prior restraint on the freedom of the press."155
One month later, the second lawsuit challenging the military's press restrictions was filed by
151 Greer v. Spock, 428 U.S. 828, 838 (1976).
152 "Freedom of the Press is a Fundamental Right and There is a Presumption Against a Prior Restraint of
the Press," in The Media and The Gulf War, ed. Hedrick Smith, (Washington, D.C.: Seven Locks Press,
1992), 417; Richmond Newspaper, Inc. v. Virginia, 448 U.S. 555 (1980); and Globe Newspaper Co. v.
Superior Court, 457 U.S. 596 (1982).
153New York Times v. U.S., 403 U.S. 713, 732 (1971).
154John R. MacArthur, Second Front: Censorship and Propaganda in the Gulf War (New York City: Hill
and Wang, 1992), 34; David Stebenne, "The Military and the Media: The Gulf Conflict in Historical
Perspective," The Media at War: The Press and the Persian Gulf Conflict (New York City: A Report of the
Gannett Foundation, 1991), 20; and Richard Zoglin, "It Was a Public Relations Rout Too," Time. 11 March
1991,57.
155 Stebenne, 20.
33
Agence France-Presse (AFP), when the French news agency was excluded from the press pools. The
agency complained that the military allowed Associated Press (AP) and Rueters to participate in the pool
systems, but not AFP. The suit asked for a ruling that "the pool restrictions constituted an unconstitutional
interference with the media's ability to gather news." The suit also requested that "photos produced by
pool members be made available to AFP until the case was resolved."156 The media attorney claimed that:
In a drastic departure from the practices observed throughout the history of this nation,
including the era of modem warfare and reflected in World War II and the Vietnam War,
defendants and their recent predecessors have imposed restrictions on press access to
overt military operations of United States armed forces which had formally been open to
the media.157
Often media attorneys complained that the pool system, the military escort and the security review
process illegally interfered with their ability to gather and report news, and this was "in violation of the
First Amendment's free press guarantee and the Fourteeth Amendment's due process clause."158 The larger
media players (the three major television networks, The Washington Post. The New York Times and
Newsdav) were invited to participate in the lawsuit but "declined either to join the suit or to contribute
friend-of-the-court briefs once the suit was filed."159
Both suits were combined because they raised the same issues. The Justice Department said "that
the press restrictions had been imposed to protect the security of U.S. military forces," and "the use of pools
was 'not intended to be a permanent feature of media coverage of the hostilities in the Persian Gulf.'"160 On
February 25, U.S. District Court Judge Leonard Sand ordered the Defense Department to explain how the
ground-war phase of the war would affect the media guidelines and ground rules.
Now that Operation Desert Shield has entered a new operational stage, is there any intent
to revise or lift the regulations on media coverage previously furnished to this court? If
so, when and in what respect? If the answer was no, the second question was: When, if
156 Stebenne, 21.
157 "Excerpts from the Plaintiff's (Press) Lawsuit Brief," 392.
158 Stebenne, 20-21.
159MacArthur, 34.
160 Stebenne, 21.
34
ever, is it intended that said regulations will be revised or lifted?161
Sand scheduled a preliminary hearing for March 7. Although the war ended before the case began, Judge
Sand eventually issued his ruling which concluded:
That this Court cannot now determine that some limitation on the number ofjournalists
granted access to a battlefield in the next overseas military operation may not be a
reasonable time, place, and manner restriction valid under the First and Fifth
Amendments.163
By establishing pool coverage in the early stages of Operation Desert Shield, the war theater
became a limited public forum. Although Judge Sand declined to decide "whether the government is
constitutionally required to open the battlefield to the press as representatives of the public."163
These lawsuits sought media access. They did not seek to establish a new right, but "sought to
protect a right which has always existed and which defendants [The Department of Defense] have only
recently, and very effectively, denied."164 The Department of Defense argued that
The use of news media pools to cover U.S. combat operations during the initial stages of
Operation Desert Storm does not shut off access by the press to these operations. Rather,
it controls press access by initially limiting forward area entry to nine newsgathering
pools composed of eighteen or seven members each, which all news media are welcome
to join.165
Judge Sand wrote that
If the reasoning of these recent access cases were followed in a military context, there is
support for the proposition that the press has at least some minimal right of access to view
and report about major events that affect the functioning of government, including, for
example, an overt combat operation.166
A third lawsuit contested the military guidelines on behalf of several photographers, media
representatives, veteran groups and family support groups. The lawsuit claimed that the decision to bar
161 Ibid.
162Judge Leonard B. Sand, U.S.D.J., "Excerpts from the Court Opinion," in The Media and The Gulf
War, ed. Hedrick Smith, (Washington, D.C.: Seven Locks Press, 1992), 405.
163Ibid., 413.
164 "Excerpts from the Plaintiffs (Press) Lawsuit Brief," 391.
165 "Excerpts from the Defendant's (Pentagon) Lawsuit Brief," 401.
166 Sand, 412.
35
public and press access to Dover Air Force Base violated the press' freedom to gather news and the citizens'
rights of free expression.167 Dover Air Force Base received the bodies of military personnel killed in the
war, and the plaintiffs asserted that "the military's restrictions were intended to shield the public from
disturbing images of returning coffins rather than to protect the nation's security."168
The Department of Defense countered, "The public had no absolute right of access to a military
base and that closing the Dover installation to the general public and the press protected the privacy of
grieving families and friends."169 The military argued that allowing access to the public and the press
would raise a national security concern, by interfering "with base personnel's ability to carry out tasks
related to the supply of material to U.S. forces in the Persian Gulf."170 U.S. District Court Judge Royce
Lambeth denied the plaintiffs' request on February 25, saying "the military could limit access to its
installation in furtherance of a legitimate purpose, and that protecting the privacy of the dead soldiers'
relatives constituted one."171
The media does not have the same constitutional protections for access as it has for the
dissemination and publication of information. A crucial part of the newsgathering process for any
journalists and photojoumalists is access to a newsworthy scene or event. Within the last ten years, the
military has successfully limited access to the media during military interventions. When contested, the
courts agreed with the military's national and operational security claims; this was true during the War in
the Gulf.
Access during the War in the Gulf
The War in the Gulf was the first major U.S. military commitment since the Vietnam War. Along
with the military buildup, the media prepared for the biggest story of the Nineties. While President Bush
167 Stebenne, 21-22.
168Ibid., 22.
169Ibid.
170Ibid.
171 Ibid.
36
and Saddam Hussein were rhetorically drawing lines in the sand, the Pentagon prepared news media
guidelines which proscribed interviews with military personnel without the proper military escort. There
was also a military censor's "security review" established for all stories, photographs and video footage.
Only a handful of journalists and photojoumalists were allowed to cover the war from the front. The rest of
the media covered the war from the rear.172
The use of news media pools during the War in the Gulf did not shut off access to military
operations. During the early stages of Operation Desert Shield, the Washington bureau chiefs entered into
an agreement with the Pentagon. This agreement allowed combat coverage by journalists and
photojoumalists working in pools but only when they were escorted by military public affairs officers.
Nine newsgathering pools were composed of 18 or seven members each. Richard H.P. Sia, a reporter for
the Baltimore Sun, said that "Our [the media's] ability to gather meaningful news was severely inhibited."
He added, "Much of the access to U.S. troops was strictly controlled by the Joint Information Bureau in
Dhahran."173
Journalists in the media pools were highly competitive and were concerned with protecting their
exclusive right to the news.174 The media pools excluded foreign members of the press corp. Agence
France-Presse, the French news agency, filed a lawsuit challenging their exclusion. Their lawsuit was
combined with another lawsuit filed by the Center for Constitutional Rights on behalf of news organizations
and journalists, which raised the same issues. The war ended before there was a resolution to the cases.
On August 10, 1990, eight days after Iraq invaded Kuwait, Navy Captain Ron Wildermuth wrote a
secret 10-page memo soon to be known as Annex Foxtrot which outlined the military's public information
policy. It emphasized one rule above all others for media coverage of Operations Desert Shield and Storm:
"News media representatives will be escorted at all times."175 The military spin doctors and censors were
172 Sydney H. Schanberg, "Censoring for (Military) Political Security," Washington Journalism Review.
13, March 1991,24.
173Richard H.P. Sia, interview by Victor J. Paul, 20 June 1994, Compu Serve Forum.
174 Ottosen, 140.
175MacArthur, 7.
37
quite successful in limiting media access to only "approved" news stories and information.176
The real test of these guidelines, however, came during the ground campaign of the war. The Wall
Street Journal's John Fialka said:
Censorship was not the problem . . . Access and communications were what too many
Army units failed to provide—and as a result, the public did not get a clear, timely picture
of the crucial Army effort, an effort that revealed the troops, their equipment, and their
commanders in the great test of combat.177
News coverage of the War in the Gulf was unlike coverage of any other war. During its aroundthe-clock coverage of the War in the Gulf, Cable News Network (CNN) carried the following warning
every hour:
CNN is working to bring you the most complete war coverage possible. However,
various restrictions have been imposed on access to information and war locations. Iraq,
Israel, and Saudi Arabia have imposed restrictions for coverage of war activity in their
countries. The U.S. military and the British military are also restricting certain
information and access. The authorities involved feel the restrictions are necessary for
security reasons. CNN is respecting these guide-lines and will tell you when the reports
you see are affected.178
In his statement before the U.S. Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs, Assistant Secretary
of Defense Pete Williams said, "They [journalists] are worried about how much access they'll have to the
Army and Marines in the event the President decides to proceed with the next phase of the campaign,
intensifying action on the ground."179 Molly Moore, the Pentagon correspondent for the Washington Post.
remarked that "censorship was not the problem; access was the problem." She added, "Censorship in my
mind is them telling me 'you can't report the outcome'. . . I think it's semantics in the way we look at
censorship and the way we look at access."180
In the War in the Gulf, the ground-campaign press arrangements were "suited to the peculiar
176Walter S. Baer, Technology's Challenges to the First Amendment (San Monica: RAND, 1992), 1617.
177Fialka, xiii.
178Taylor, 24-25.
179 Williams, 41.
180MacArthur, 160.
38
conditions there. ”181 Journalists accompanied military units in pool systems. They were a part of a highly
mobile operation. AP photographer Scott Applewhite said, "I've got to have that access, I've got to be able
to use their vehicles, their helicopters."182
The generals in the field controlled all access to the war. Pete Williams, in his statement before
the U.S. Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs, said before the war that "Our frontline units will not
have the capacity to accommodate large numbers of reporters."183 While the Army was grudgingly
accepting the photojoumalists and journalists assigned to them, the Marines never seemed to get enough
media in the field. They were badgering the Joint Information Bureau for more journalists, even as the
ground campaign started.184
Much of the media coverage during the war focused on the Marines, and left public unaware of the
bigger picture taking shape on the Army's battles during the ground campaign. By denying access to many
of the combat areas before the ground campaign, General Schwarzkopf was able to withhold information
about the massive armored forces in positions along the Iraqi border.185
Besides limiting access to military units and troops in Saudi Arabia, the main military mortuary at
Dover Air Force Base was closed to the media. This closure precluded photography, videotaping or any
news coverage of the arrival of war dead at the mortuary.186 One reason for closing the base to the media
was the 1990 network broadcast that showed split-screen images of President Bush's speech glorifying the
Panama invasion alongside rows of coffins bearing the troops killed in action.187 The military said that
media access to Dover Air Force Base interfered with the ability to supply material to the U.S. forces in the
181 Williams, 33.
182Fialka, 60.
183 Williams, 42.
184Fialka, 27.
185Major General Perry M. Smith, How CNN Fought the War (New York City: A Birch Lane Press
Book, 1991), 71.
186 Schanberg, 54.
187MacArthur, 245.
Persian Gulf.188
The War in the Gulf was the first real-time television war. Around midnight on January 16, 1991,
the networks began receiving pool footage released by military censors. The footage showed fighter jets
and bombers launching against targets in Iraq. CBS reporter Bob Simon noted that "the pictures were
specifically chosen to produce the image of a neat, methodical, sleek, clean war, 'beautiful planes taking off
in the darkness for Iraq.1"189 Later pool footage showed U.S. pilots bombing Baghdad. One pilot reported
that "the bombing of Baghdad looked like Fourth of July fireworks, with the sky lighting up like a
Christmas tree."190 ABC, used a British International Television News (ITN) report by Brent Sadler and
footage shot by ABC cameraman Fabrice Moussus, who used a special night lens. The video showed
explosions of light in the sky over Baghdad. Antiaircraft fire, tracer bullets and bombs, exploding in the
sky, produced a spectacular sound and light show.191
Some of the war's most memorable images were "the remarkable gun-camera footage of precision
bombs, produced not by journalists but by the military."192 According to David Gergen, the former Reagan
White House aide who helped pioneer the use of images to form public opinion, "those videos had an
enormous impact on the American public."193 Most of the air campaign images featured on the television
networks were camera shots from Allied planes or Patriot missile launches from Israel and Saudi Arabia.194
Photojoumalists who were lucky enough to be in one of the media pools, found that Army generals
controlled the images the photojoumalists recorded. Some of these restrictions bordered on the rediculous.
188 Stebenne, 22.
189Kellner, 131.
190Ibid., 135.
191 Ibid., 157.
192Jason DeParle, "Keeping the News in Step: Are Pentagon Rules Here to Stay?" in The Media and The
Gulf War, ed. Hedrick Smith, (Washington, D.C.: Seven Locks Press, 1992), 386.
193 Ibid.
194Robert Lichter, "The Instant Replay War," in The Media and The Gulf War, ed. Hedrick Smith,
(Washington, D.C.: Seven Locks Press, 1992), 229.
40
Scott Pelley, a CBS news correspondent, said military escorts from the 18th Airborne Corp would not allow
television crews to videotape soldiers arguing. Major General John H. Tilelli ordered that no pictures
"could be taken of troopers unless they had their helmets on and their chin straps buckled."195
The photo pool was managed by photo editors from the Associated Press, Rueters, Time.
Newsweek and U.S. News and World Report. Donald Mell, the Associated Press photo editor who
coordinated the pool during the ground campaign, said, "There were nights when we had as many as 180
rolls of film coming in. That means over 6,000 images."196 From all these images, the editors chose 20 that
became the official photo pool report for that day. The wire services transmitted those images to their
newspaper customers because "that's essentially what the system could hold."197
The editors in the photo pool contended with other problems during the war. The KnightRidder/Chicago Tribune Newswire demanded a the leadership role in the pool, but the photo pool leaders
rejected them.198 The sudden influx of photojoumalists in Saudi Arabia created more difficulties because
"A lot of them came off the plane and thought they were going to get a photo pass for the 50-yard line."199
By the time the war actually started, many photo pool positions were already filled.
On Januaiy 20, CNN's Peter Arnett reported from Baghdad that "seven allied POWs had been
interviewed that evening on Iraqi TV, dressed in military uniforms and sitting in front of a white wall."200
The bruised and puffy face of Naval Aviator Lt. Jeffrey Zaun became a symbol of the POWs' plight. His
image, along with the other POWs', was repeated on the television newscasts, was the topic of discussion
on talk radio shows, and was front-page photos in newspapers and magazines. After the war, Zaun said that
"his injuries resulted from ejection and that he punched himself in the face a couple of times so that he
195 Fialka, 16-17.
196Ibid., 37.
197 Ibid.
198 Taylor, 38.
199 Ibid., 39.
200 Kellner, 189.
41
wouldn't be put on Iraqi TV."201
The so-called battle of Khafji, a border town between Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, was fought on
January 31. This was the only skirmish during the War in the Gulf where soldiers shot at and killed each
other. A French television crew, arriving at the outskirts of Khafji, was "greeted by angry shouts from
attending pool reporters."202 French producer Alain Debos claimed, "the crew was forced at gunpoint by
Marines to give up videotape it had shot of a wounded U.S. soldier."203
The ground campaign began the night of February 22. As the American public waited for more
information, the media found itself in a news blackout of information from the front lines. The news
blackout lasted for the first 12 hours of the ground war. Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney made this
statement to the press on the blackout:
I want to assure all of you that we understand our solemn obligation to the American
people to keep informed of developments. But I am confident that they understand that
this policy is necessary to save lives and to reduce American casualties, as well as those
of coalition forces.204
As the largest military attack since World War II got under way, the Army's system for supporting
the media covering the war collapsed. Many couriers, military escorts and journalists, as well as news
copy, film and videotapes, were lost in the desert.205 Television pool photographers had to get their images
back to the censors to be cleared and fed to satellites for broadcast in the United States. Gary Matsumoto,
an NBC and pool reporter assigned to cover the U.S. Army 24th Mechanized Division assault of Iraq, said:
Our presence at the front was somewhat 'academic.' We'd shoot the action, but there was
no way to get videotape back. Fine for the Library of Congress, a disaster for Nightly
News. But even if the couriers had been swift and sure, the pool arrangement would have
yielded poor footage.206
201 Ibid., 191.
202 Ibid., 276.
203 Ibid., 276.
204 Dick Cheney, "Statement to the Prc33," in The Media and The Gulf War, ed. Hedrick Smith,
(Washington, D.C.: Seven Locks Press, 1992), 27-28.
205 Fialka, 12.
206MacArthur, 190.
42
The first video image from the ground war was from ITN’s Sandy Gall's pool report of Coalition
forces moving over Saddam Hussein's much-vaulted sand fortifications.207 As more pool footage cleared
military censors, the television networks broadcast images of Iraqi prisoners, abandoned foxholes, burning
oil wells and Coalition forces racing unimpeded through Kuwait and Iraq.
AP photographer John Gaps, working with the 7th Combat Engineers Brigade, sent a packet of
film on the first day only to receive it back on the third day for some unknown reason. Another batch of his
film arrived in Dhahran more than a month later. Gaps said, "I have these beautiful pictures and nobody
will ever see them."208
James Wooten, an ABC news reporter, had shot video footage of tank battles and an entire Iraqi
company that surrendered to his television crew. Wooten went to Colonel Leroy Goff, the brigade
commander, and told him, "The stuff I've got is going to end up in the archives unless I get out of here and
get it on the air tomorrow."209 Colonel Goff used one of the division's helicopters to fly Wooten to Dhahran
so he could report his story live on "Good Morning America."
The most violent single event during the war occurred on February 25. An Iraqi Scud missile
crashed into the American troop's barracks near Dhahran. The explosion and shock wave sent shrapnel into
sleeping soldiers killing 27 and wounding 98.210 Scott Applewhite, an Associated Press photographer, was
the first journalist to arrive. "He was shoved around by guards, he had his film confiscated, and then was
escorted back to the Dhahran International Hotel by a public affairs officer," and was told that "host-nation
sensibilities forbade any pictures."211
As the pool system broke down toward the final hours of the war, journalists invaded Kuwait.
Images of the massacre of the Iraqi military by the Coalition forces began to emerge. As journalists
207 Kellner, 346.
208 Fialka, 21.
209 Ibid., 22.
210 Ibid., 56.
211 Ibid., 3.
43
wandered up the highway from Kuwait City to Iraq, they found evidence of the "Highway of Death." The
highway was littered with military and civilian vehicles used by Iraqis to flee Kuwait. "There were images
of one vehicle after another, mile after mile, piled upon each other, evoking a picture of a giant traffic jam
in which planes bombed and destroyed anything below themselves."212 Television networks "sanitized" the
video images of the Highway of Death by removing images of burned and mutilated bodies. A photograph
of "the ghoulish and charred body of a dead Iraqi soldier still seated upright in his disabled vehicle" was
taken by Kenneth Jarecke. It appeared in The Observer of London on March 3.213 Its later publication by
the British Guardian, created an uproar.214
There were large gaps in the media's coverage of the War in the Gulf, and major battles went
virtually uncovered. Donald Mell, a photo editor for the Associated Press, reviewed thousands of images
taken by more than 40 photographers on the battlefield. He said, "There were no dead Iraqi soldiers. We
had these massive tank battles, but I did not see a picture of an American tank being fired during the whole
thing."215 Walter Porges, an ABC network vice president who reviewed the pooled television coverage of
the war, said, "I guess you could call it censorship by lack of access. There were a couple of big battles that
nobody's seen any pictures of yet."216
Robert Schnitzlein, a Reuters photo editor, was correct when he said, "There is really no
photographic document of actual fighting in the Gulf."217 Michael Getler, foreign-news editor at The
Washington Post, agreed:
The war had the largest armored movement in history, and essentially no one saw it.
There are no pictures of it. There's nothing. I guess it was all dust-covered anyway, but
212 Kellner, 405.
213 MacArthur, 155.
214 Kellner, 431.
215 Fialka, 5.
216 Ibid., 6.
217Kellner, 155.
44
there's nothing to record this.218
One problem with covering the ground campaign was speed. Most of the photojoumalists in the
photo pool discovered that Ml tanks are much faster in the desert than the Humvees in which they traveled
with their escort officer. "Some photographers with the armored divisions shot the whole war on a few rolls
of film and they never saw anything of importance."219
Not all of the photographers and journalists followed the military's guidelines during the war. The
so-called "unilaterals" violated the pool rules by going unescorted in the battle area. The unilaterals were
the first to report on the fighting in Khafji, the first actual ground battle between Allied forces and the
Iraqis. Unilaterals operated under the assumption that if they were caught, they would be deported from
Saudi Arabia. Some of the best photographs from the war were taken by a roving band of French
photographers who called themselves the "Fuck the Pool" pool.220
Some photojoumalists were harassed by the military. On February 3, Wesley Boxce, a
photojoumalist for Time magazine, was held for 30 hours by military police from the Alabama National
Guard.221 He was blindfolded, searched and accused of being an Iraqi spy. Fred Bayles of the Associated
Press and Laurent Rebourg, a photographer, were detained by the First Cavalry Division for six hours on
February 5. "They were told they were being detained for working outside of the pool system."222
Christopher Walker, a reporter for the London Times, reported that a photographer working outside the
pools was held for six hours by U.S. Marines. The photographer was told by an officer that "we have
orders from above to make this pool system work."223
One of the most memorable photos of the war was taken by David Tumly of the Detroit Free
218 MacArthur, 159.
219 Taylor, 247.
220Kellner, 155.
221 Nicole Volpe, "How to Win," Village Voice. 26 March 1991, 17.
222 Ibid.
223 Ibid., 18.
45
Press. Tumly was with the 5th MASH unit helicopter when it rushed to a group of Bradley vehicles from
the 24th Mechanized Infantry Division. The wounded were pulled from one of the Bradley vehicles that
received a direct hit by "friendly fire." Sergeant Ken Kozakiewicz was rushed to the helicopter with a
fractured hand. The medics put the body of the driver in a bag, put it on the helicopter, and handed the
driver's identification card to Kozakiewicz. Tumly photographed Kozakiewicz crying after seeing the
identification card of a slain comrade. "It was only then that sergeant realized the body in the bag was his
friend."224 This was the moment captured on film.
Tumly waited for a few minutes and asked the men for their names and how they would feel about
having their picture published. They said, "Publish the pictures."223 A day later, the day of the cease fire,
Tumly found out that his editors had not received his film yet. He checked with military officials and they
were holding the film because there were casualties. They said, "We need to make sure that the next of kin
in your [Tumly's] frames have been notified."226
After leaving Saudi Arabia, Tumly called Kozakiewicz's family, because he was concerned that
the picture had been painful to their family. Kozakiewicz's father, Daniel, was a Vietnam veteran. He told
Tumly: "They're [the military] trying to make us think this is antiseptic, but this is war. Where is the blood
and the reality of what is happening over there? Finally, we have a picture of what really happens in
war."227
Summary
War is a tragic part of our society. War causes death and destruction not only to losers but also to
the victors. The reality of war is that people, soldiers and civilians, are killed, wounded, left homeless, and
orphaned. In the age of real time television wars and from the daily bombardment of images from the
battlefield in the media, political and military leaders have learned that fighting lengthy wars is nearly
224 David Tumly, "What Really Happens in War," Parade, in Omaha World-Herald. 9 June 1991, 5.
225 Ibid.
226 Ibid., 6.
227 Ibid., 6.
46
impossible for a democratic society.
The military, as an institution, is very methodical in its procedures and how it wages war. The
media, as also an institution, publishes and disseminates information to the public on newsworthy events.
The military can create a lexicon of war as being very strategic and surgical, with limited casualties and
minimal collateral damage to the enemy's civilian population. By controlling media access to war events,
the military can create this particular vision of war to the American public which, in fact, the military uses
to create its own picture of reality.
Lang and Lang postulates that a communication system, "no matter how sophisticated its
technological base, inevitably injects some bias into the picture of reality it presents."228 This bias becomes
evident in the coverage of an event.
Its image, as mirrored in the press, is a selective reconstruction of that event woven
around a theme and a story line that makes it coherent. Some parts of the event will
always be out of focus.229
Since the invention of photography, photojoumalists have covered wars. From line drawings to color
photographs, newspapers and magazines have published images of war. Morris writes that "No matter how
powerful the images of these war photographers have captured, our fascination tends to outweigh our
horror."250
Photojoumalists have faced many challenges covering war. Whether voluntary or strict, some
form of censorship has been placed on photojoumalists. Photographs of dead or wounded American
soldiers have always been handled with sensitivity. For photojoumalists to gather or record information,
they must have the greatest possible access to events. During times of war, photojoumalists either have not
been allowed access to combat, or they have had unlimited access to the action. Media access to war-time
events has not been given First Amendment protection by the courts.
Since the invasion of Grenada in 1983, the media has been struggling with the military for access
228 Lang and Lang, 200-201.
229 Ibid., 201.
230 Morris, 78.
47
to combat operations. During the War in the Gulf, the media had limited access to the events of the war
because only a handful of journalists and photojoumalists covered the war via a pool system implemented
by the military. This made access a problem.
Chapter III
Methodology
Access to the Wanin the Gulf by photojoumalists and access to troops aid to actual combat truly
limited the media's ability to gather information and images. Photojoumalists covering the Vietnam War
had unlimited access to nearly everything. By comparison, access in the War in the Gulf was very limited,
the opposite of the experience in Vietnam.
The main research questions proposed in this thesis are. Was there a difference in the newspapers
and magazines publication of images between the air and the ground campaign? How does this image of
war compare with the Vietnam image? What overall image or constructed image emerged from the War in
the Gulf? In order to answer these questions, this thesis will seek to answer the following sub-questions:
1) Is there a difference in the photographed scenes in published publications between the
air and ground campaign?
2) Is there a difference in the primary photographed subject in publications between the
air and ground campaign?
3) Is there a difference in the way the primary photographed subject was portrayed in
publications between the air and ground campaign?
4) Is there a difference in the photographic perspective presented in publications between
the air and ground campaign?
5) Is there a difference in the photographed scenes, subjects, portrayal and perspective
between the War in the Gulf and the Vietnam War?
This thesis will examine the combat photographs presented to the American public by three national news
magazines and three newspapers.
The still photographic image, a frozen moment in time, captures the essence of an event or a
49
subject. It can form, change and shape public opinion.1 Unlike the televised camera shots, the still image is
a static unit that can be easily counted and quantified. Currently, there are no research studies that have
examined still photos of the War in the Gulf.
Methodology
A content analysis research method will be used to analyze photographic images presented in three
national magazines: Time. Newsweek and U.S. News and World Report; and the three top circulation daily
newspapers: New York Times. Los Angeles Titnes. and The Washington Post. The magazines were
selected because they are the three top news magazines based on circulation and news reputation. The War
«
in the Gulf photo pool was partially run by the photo editors from these magazines.2 The newspapers were
selected because they are the three top circulation daily newspapers.3 All three subscribe to Associated
Press and Rueters news services, and their photo editors were represented in the official photo pool.
Other researchers were successful in using news magazines for examining combat photos.4 In
another content analysis of news photos, Moriaty and Popovich used the same three news magazines in
their research of photos and illustrations of the 1988 presidential and vice-presidential candidates.5 One
1Kenrick S. Thompson, and Alfred C. Clarke, "Photographic Imagery and the Vietnam War: An
Unexamined Perspective," Journal of Psychology. 87 (1974): 280.
2 Time has a circulation of 4,335,092 magazines according to Ulrich's Plus database. Newsweek has a
circulation of 3,240,131, and U.S. News and World Report has a circulation of 2,307,569 according to
Gale's Directory of Publication and Broadcast Media. (Detroit: Gale Research Inc., 1994).
3According to Editor and Publisher International Yearbook. (New York City: Editor and Publisher,
1994), New York Times has a circulation of 1,141,366, Los Angeles Times has a circulation of 1,089,690,
and The Washington Post has a circulation of 813,908.
4 These studies examined combat photographs published in news magazines: Charlotte Niemeyer,
"Recording the Vietnam War: Photographic Coverage in Newsmagazines from 1964 to 1973" (Masters'
Thesis, University of Nebraska at Omaha, 1990), 1-71; Oscar Pattersons, "Television's Living Room War in
Print: Vietnam in the News Magazines," Journalism Quarterly. 61 (Spring 1984): 35-39; Michael D. Sherer,
"Comparing Magazine Photos of Vietnam and Korean Wars," Journalism Quarterly. 65 (Fall 1988): 752756; and Michael D. Sherer, "Vietnam War Photos and Public Opinion," Journalism Quarterly. 66 (Summer
1989): 391-395.
5 Sandra E. Moriaty and Mary N. Popovich, "Newsmagazine Visuals and the 1988 Presidential
Election," Journalism Quarterly. 68 (Fall 1991): 374.
50
researcher had success using newspapers for examining combat photos,6and one researcher included
"armed conflicts" as a category for his newspaper content analysis.7
Content Analysis
Berelson defined content analysis as a "research technique for the objective, systematic and
quantitative description of the manifest content of communication."8 "Manifest content" means that the
content is accepted to mean what is said or printed, and not what is between the lines.9 KrippendorfF
defines content analysis as a research technique for making replicable and valid inferences from data to
their context.
As a research technique, content analysis involves specialized procedures for processing scientific
data. Like all research techniques, its purpose is to provide knowledge, new insights, a representation of
"facts" and a practical guide to action; it is a tool.10 Content analysis has been used in several research
studies to analyze news photographs.11 Some studies used content analysis of photographs of war,12while
6Michael D. Sherer, "Invasion of Poland Photos in Four American Newspapers," Journalism Quarterly.
61 (Summer 1984): 422-426.
7James Fosdick, "Picture Content and Source in Four Daily Newspapers," Journalism Quarterly. 46
(Summer 1969): 368-371.
8Bernard Berelson, Content Analysis in Communication Research (New York: The Free Press, 1952),
18.
9Ibid.
10Klaus Krippendorff, Content Analysis: An Introduction to its Methodology (Beverly Hills: Sage
Publication, Inc., 1980), 12-14.
11 These studies utilized content analysis to analyze news photographs: Roy E. Blackwood, "The Content
of News Photos: Roles Portrayed by Men and Women," Journalism Quarterly. 60 (Winter 1983): 710-714;
Fosdick, "Picture Content and Source in Four Daily Newspapers,": Phillip C. Geraci, "Newspaper
Illustration and Readership: Is USA Today on Target?" Journalism Quarterly. 61 (Summer 1984): 409-413;
Larry Leslie, "Newspaper Photo Coverage of Censure of McCarthy," Journalism Quarterly. 63 (Winter
1983): 850-853; Susan Miller, "The Content of News Photos: Women's and Men's Roles," Journalism
Quarterly. 52 (Spring 1975): 70-75; Moriaty and Popovich, 371-380; Michael Singletary, "Newspaper
Photographs: A Content Analysis 1936-1976," Journalism Quarterly. 55 (Autumn 1978): 585-589; Michael
Singletary and Chris Lamb, "News Value in Award Winning Photos," Journalism Quarterly. 61 (Spring
1984): 104; Glen G. Sparks and Christine L. Fehlner, "Faces in the News: Gender Comparisons of
Magazine Photographs," Journal of Communication. ?, (Autumn 1986): 70-79; Guido H. Stempel,
"Visibility of Blacks in News and News-Picture Magazine," Journalism Quarterly. 48 (Summer 1971): 337339; Edward Trayer and Bruce Cook, "Picture Emphasis
in Final Editions of 16 Dailies," Journalism Quarterly. 54 (Autumn 1977): 595, and Kuo-jen Tsang, "News
51
several other studies have concentrated on the photographic images of war.13
Television presented the War in the Gulf in real time, and newspapers and magazines were behind
in their coverage. Photographic images were selected over television images because they provide simple,
contained units that can be measured empirically. This thesis will be looking for images published in three
national magazines and three leading newspapers during the War in the Gulf. This thesis will look at all
photographic images taken in the war theater region between January 14, 1991, and March 18, 1991. This
allows time for any photos taken during the ground campaign to be published. Photographic images that
are formal portraits of military and government leaders, file photos, file photos of military equipment and
facilities will be omitted from the study. The exception to formal portraits taken in content of the conflict
will be examined.
Photographic images will be coded from microfiche copies of all issues of Time and Newsweek
magazines, and from original magazine issues of U.S. News and World Report, and from microfilm copies
of all issues of New York Times. Los Angeles Times and The Washington Post in the University of
Nebraska at Omaha's Library. The author and two other coders coded randomly selected subsets of images
Photos in Time and Newsweek.'1Journalism Quarterly. 61 (Autumn 1984): 578-584.
12 These studies used content analysis to examine war photographs: Charlotte Niemeyer, "Recording the
Vietnam War: Photographic Coverage in Newsmagazines from 1964 to 1973" (Masters' Thesis, University
of Nebraska at Omaha, 1990), 1-71; Oscar Pattersons, "Television's Living Room War in Print: Vietnam in
the News Magazines," Journalism Quarterly. 61 (Spring 1984): 35-39; Michael D. Sherer, "Comparing
Magazine Photos of Vietnam and Korean Wars," Journalism Quarterly. 65 (Fall 1988): 752-756; Michael
D. Sherer, "Vietnam War Photos and Public Opinion," Journalism Quarterly. 66 (Summer 1989): 391-395;
and Kenrick S. Thompson, and Alfred C. Clarke, "Photographic Imagery and the Vietnam War: An
Unexamined Perspective," The Journal of Psychology. 87 (1975): 279-292.
13 Sherer (in "Invasion of Poland Photos...," p. 423) noted that "a few studies have focused on
photographs of war, readers reaction of war photography and the use of photography as a propaganda
weapon in times of war and peace." These studies include: Clifton Edom, "Photo-propaganda: The History
of Its Development," Journalism Quarterly. 24 (Spring 1947): 221-226; James A. Fosdick, "Photography in
War and Peace," Journalism Quarterly. 24 (Spring 1947): 227-232; Jack Lule, "Enduring Image of War:
Analysis of a Newsweek Cover," from Proceedings of the 74th Annual Meeting of the Association for
Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Boston, Massachusetts, 7 -10 August 1991, ERIC ED
336 795; John E. Newhagen, "The Relationship Between Censorship and the Emotional and Critical Tone
of Television News Coverage of the Persian Gulf War," Journalism Quarterly. 71 (Spring 1991): 32-42; and
Kenrick S. Thompson, Alfred C. Clarke, and Simon Dintz, "Reaction to My-Lai: A Visual-Verbal,"
Sociology and Social Research. 58 (1974): 122-129.
52
from magazine and newspaper issues to establish intercoder reliability for this study.14 Following
Krippendorff s lowest standard recommendation, intercoder reliability level will be established at 0.67.15
The reliability was evaluated by using a method explained by Holsti:
Coefficient of reliability = _____ 2M_____
N, + N2
In this formula, M represents the number of coding agreements, while N, and N2represents the number of
decisions made by each coder.16 According to Stempel, "By reliability, we mean simply consistency of
classification."17
Because there are only a limited number of studies using content analysis of war photographs,
those studies were reviewed for guidelines and categories for this proposal.18 There is a real advantage to
using a category system used in other studies, because the results of those studies will anticipate the kinds
of results that are likely.19 The categories used in studies by Niemeyer, Patterson, Sherer, and Thompson
and Clarke fit the format of this proposal and were adapted for this study. The categories include:
1. Scene—the moment captured in the image will be coded as:
a. Actual combat setting with troops under fire and/or military equipment in action.
b. Combat-related setting, pre/post-combat scene or troop movements in combat areas,
but not actually in combat when the photo was taken.
14 One of the coders was a male graduate student in the Communication department, who has recently
finished his thesis. The other coder was a female, a former research assistant at the University of NebraskaLincoln who is a veterinarian.
15Krippendorff, 147.
16Ole R. Holsti, Content Analysis for the Social Sciences and Humanities (Reading: Addison-Wesley,
1969), 140; and Richard W. Budd, Robert K. Thorp, and Lewis Donohew, Content Analysis of
Communications (New York: Macmillan Company, 1967), 68.
17 Giodo H. Stempel, "Content Analysis," chap. in Research Methods in Mass Communication. 2d Ed.,
ed. Giodo H. Stempel, and Bruce H. Westley, (Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall, 1989), 132.
18Niemeyer, 1-71; Patterson, 35-39; Sherer, "Comparing Magazine Photos...," 752-756; Sherer,
"Vietnam War Photos...," 391-395; and Thompson and Clarke, 279-292.
19 Stempel, 128.
53
c. Non-combat scene, out of the field of combat, in areas of relative safety such as cities,
headquarters, or other locations.
2. Subject—these subjects of the picture will be coded as being present, not present and equipment,
weapons or targets destroyed:
a. American soldiers.
b. Coalition soldiers.
c. Iraqi soldiers.
d. Civilians (in the Middle East).
e. Iraqi civilians.
f. American or Coalition weapons, equipment, or targets in Iraq.
g. Iraqi weapons, equipment, or targets in Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait.
3. Portrayal—the way in which the primary subject was portrayed will be coded as:
a. Immediate life-threatening situation with dead or wounded present.
b. Immediate life-threatening situation with no dead or wounded present.
c. Situation depicting combat-related discomfort or fatigue.
d. Situation depicting soldier(s) resting and relaxing.
e. Situation depicting preparing equipment for war.
f. Situation depicting soldier(s) in action, but not in combat.
g. Situation depicting civilians with dead or wounded present.
h. Situation depicting civilians with no dead or wounded present.
i. Weapons, equipment or targets shown in a state of destruction from combat.
j. Weapons, equipment or targets not shown in a state of destruction from combat,
k. American or Coalition Prisoners of War (POW).
1. Iraqi POWs.
m. Situation depicting wounded soldier(s).
n. Situation depicting dead soldier(s).
4. Perspective—the way in which the photograph captured the situation will be coded as:
54
a. Close-up, small number of people or objects which are identifiable.
b. Close-up, small number of people or objects which are not identifiable.
c. Normal view of people or objects which are identifiable.
d. Normal view of people or objects which are not identifiable.
e. Distant view of people or objects which are identifiable.
f. Distant view of people or objects which are not identifiable.
g. Blurred image.
Once the photographic images have been coded, they will be placed into two groups related to the
air and ground campaigns. The first group will include photographs published from January 14, 1991 to
February 23, 1991, during the air campaign. The second group will be photographs published from
February 24 1991, to March 18, 1991, during the ground campaign.
After the coding was completed, a series of cross-tabulations was ran to determine what was the
stoiy told through the published images. A Chi-square analysis was used to test the distribution of
frequencies among the three magazines and the three newspapers. The results were used to answer the
central research questions. Was there a difference in the newspapers and magazines publication of images
between the air and the ground campaign? How does this image of war compare with the Vietnam image?
What overall image or constructed image emerged from the War in the Gulf? In order to answer these
questions, this thesis will seek to answer the following sub-questions:
1) Is there a difference in the photographed scenes in published publications between the
air and ground campaign?
2) Is there a difference in the primary photographed subject in publications between the
air and ground campaign?
3) Is there a difference in the way the primary photographed subject was portrayed in
publications between the air and ground campaign?
4) Is there a difference in the photographic perspective presented in publications between
the air and ground campaign?
5) Is there a difference in the photographed scenes, subjects, portrayal and perspective
55
between the War in the Gulf and the Vietnam War?
Chapter IV
Results and Discussion
The media followed the American soldiers and their allies into battle during the War in the Gulf,
but the duration was very short compared to other wars in American history. Photojoumalists, working for
their respective publications, recorded the war's events on film. Through these photographic images, this
thesis will answer the following research questions: Was there a difference in the newspapers and
magazines publication of images between the air and the ground campaign? How does this image of war
compare with the Vietnam image? What overall image or constructed image emerged from the War in the
Gulf? In order to answer these questions, this thesis will seek to answer the following sub-questions:
1) Is there a difference in the photographed scenes in published publications between the
air and ground campaign?
2) Is there a difference in the primary photographed subject in publications between the
air and ground campaign?
3) Is there a difference in the way the primary photographed subject was portrayed in
publications between the air and ground campaign?
4) Is there a difference in the photographic perspective presented in publications between
the air and ground campaign?
5) Is there a difference in the photographed scenes, subjects, portrayal and perspective
between the War in the Gulf and the Vietnam War?
Photographic images were coded from January 14 through March 18, 1991, of microfiche issues of
Time and Newsweek magazines, and from original magazine issues of U.S. News and World Report, and
from microfilm copies of New York Times. Los Angeles Times and The Washington Post in the University
of Nebraska at Omaha's Library. Intercoder reliability was measured by having two additional people code
a subset of the studied images using the author's categories and guidelines. Holsti and the Krippendorff s
57
guidelines establish 0.67 as the lowest recommended standard "Coefficient of Reliability" for intercoder
reliability.1 Intercoder reliability test results for the categories met the recommended guidelines.2 Using
cross tabulation analysis, the coded images were analyzed to provide answers to the research questions and
sub-questions.
Phases o f The War in the Gulf
The Vietnam War has been analyzed by other researchers who divided the war into two distinct
phases: pre-Tet offensive (January 1968) and post-Tet.3 The photographic image presented during the
Vietnam War differed before and after the Tet Offensive.4 Similarly, the War in the Gulf can be separated
into two distinct phases; the air campaign and the ground campaign.
The War in the Gulfs air campaign began January 16, 1991, when Coalition forces started aroundthe-clock bombing missions over Iraq and Kuwait; these continued throughout the war. The ground
campaign started on February 23 and lasted until February 28, 1991 when Iraq agreed to a cease-fire. For
analytical purposes, photographic images during the air campaign were coded between January 14 and
February 23, 1991,5 Images coded from the ground campaign were published between February 24 and
1Ole R. Holsti, Content Analysis for the Social Sciences and Humanities (Reading: Addison-Wesley,
1969), 140; Richard W. Budd, Robert K. Thorp, and Lewis Donohew, Content Analysis of
Communications (New York: Macmillan Company, 1967), 68; and Klaus Krippendorff, Content Analysis:
An Introduction to its Methodology (Beverly Hills: Sage Publication, Inc., 1980), 147.
2Intercoder reliability test results for the following categories: Scene, 0.97; American Soldiers, 0.97;
Coalition soldiers, 0.76; Iraqi soldiers, 0.90; Civilians (in the Middle East), 0.88; Iraqi civilians, 0.94;
American or Coalition weapons, equipment, or targets in Iraq, 0.68; Iraqi weapons, equipment, or targets in
Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait, 0.88; Portrayal, 0.76 and Perspective, 0.92. See Appendix 2 for formula
and results.
3 These researchers divided the Vietnam War into two distinct phases: Charlotte Niemeyer, "Recording
the Vietnam War: Photographic Coverage in Newsmagazines from 1964 to 1973" (Masters' Thesis,
University of Nebraska at Omaha, 1990), 1-71; and Michael D. Sherer, "Vietnam War Photos and Public
Opinion," Journalism Quarterly. 66 (Summer 1989): 391-395.
4Niemeyer, 62; and Sherer, "Vietnam War Photos and Public Opinion," 394.
5 Since newspapers are published daily and magazines are published weekly, the author chose January
14 to correspond with the magazine issues released before the start of the war.
58
March 18, 1991.6
There were 1,853 images from the War in the Gulf presented in the newsmagazines and
newspapers selected for evaluation. The images were evaluated for their primary scene, subject or subjects,
portrayal of the subject(s) and the perspective of the image. The primary scene was coded for the moment
captured in the image as either: "actual combat setting," "combat-related setting" and "non-combat scene.
The subject or subjects of photographs were coded as present or not present. To determine the portrayal of
the subject(s), the photograph was coded for the way the primary subjects) was portrayed. Finally, the
perspective was coded for the angle or view in which the photograph captured the situation.
During the war, more "actual combat" photographs were taken during the air campaign than the
ground campaign. During the air campaign, most of the images of actual combat included: military
supplied "Nintendo like" cross haired images of bombing targets over Iraq and Kuwait, photographs of
Coalition planes launching on bombing sorties, and images from the battle of Khafji, a Saudi Arabian Kuwaiti border town where Coalition and Iraqi soldiers actually shot at each other. The air campaign
spanned several weeks and produced 1,167 (63.0 percent) of the images; the ground campaign lasted
several days and produced 686 (37.0 percent) of the images. Coverage of the War of the Gulf tended to
favor images from the air campaign.
Scene
Of the 1,853 images, 214 (11.6 percent) showed an "actual combat setting" with troops under fire
and/or military equipment in action. The largest number of photographs, 1,118 (60.3 percent) fell in the
"combat-related setting." These photographs show pre/post-combat scenes or troop movements in combat
areas but not in combat when the photo was taken. In the final category, "non-combat setting," 521 (28.1
percent) of the images showed scenes away from the field of combat and in relatively safe areas (cities,
headquarters, etc.).
6Even though the ground campaign started the night of February 23, images from the war zone would be
delayed in publication by a coverage blackout for security review purposes. February 24, 1991 was
selected by the author as the starting date for coding images from the ground campaign.
59
There was a difference in the presentation of actual combat images between the War in the Gulf
(11.6 percent) and the Vietnam War (25.9 percent).7 Since photojoumalists covering the War in the Gulf
had less access and tougher guidelines than those covering the Vietnam War, there is a relative difference
between the number of actual combat photos published in the press.
The War in the Gulf had 60.3 percent of its images in the combat-related category while the
Vietnam War had 35.2 percent in this category. Photojoumalists with access to the events of the war cover
it differently than photojoumalists with restricted access. The non-combat category photographic coverage
between the two wars was similar. During the War in the Gulf, 28.1 percent of the images were non­
combat, and 38.9 percent for the Vietnam War images.8
War in the Gulf photographic images showed more "combat-related" than "actual combat"
settings. The same is true from the Vietnam War, but there was a higher percentage of "actual combat"
photographs presented to the American public. There was only an eight percent difference between the two
wars in showing "non-combat" settings.
The presentation of the primary scene between the six publications showed no pattern of
difference in the publication of "actual combat," "combat-related" and "non-combat" photographs (Table I).
7An average of "actual combat" photographs taken in Vietnam was obtain from the following research
studies: Niemeyer, 64; Michael D. Sherer, "Comparing Magazine Photos of Vietnam and Korean Wars,"
Journalism Quarterly. 65 (Fall 1988): 755; and Sherer, "Vietnam War Photos and Public Opinion," 395.
8An average of "combat-related" and "non-combat setting" photographs taken in Vietnam was obtained
from the following research studies: Niemeyer, 64; and Sherer, "Vietnam War Photos and Public Opinion,"
395.
60
TABLE I
THE PRESENTATION OF THE PRIMARY SCENE OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS DURING THE WAR IN
THE GULF BETWEEN THE SIX PUBLICATIONS BY PERCENT
New York
Times
Los Angeles Washington
Post
Times
Time
Newsweek
U.S. News
& World
Report
Actual Combat scene
1.7
3.2
2.9
0.9
1.1
1.7
Combat-Related scene
10.7
18.0
14.1
5.2
7.3
5.0
Non-combat scene
5.1
10.5
5.9
2.0
2.1
2.6
Total
N= 1,853
17.5
31.6
23.0
8.1
10.5
9.3
The Los Angeles Times published more photographic images, 586 (31.6 percent), than the Washington
Post. 426 (23.0 percent), and the New York Times. 325 (17.5 percent). The Los Angeles Times published
59 photographic images of "actual combat scenes," while the Washington Post published 54 and the New
York Times published 32 photographs. Newsweek magazine published 194 (10.5 percent) images
compared to U.S. News and World Reports. 172 (9.3 percent), and Time. 150 (8.1 percent) photographs.
Even though Newsweek published the most photographs during the war, U.S News and World Reports
published the most "actual combat scenes" with 31 (1.7 percent) photographs.
Subject
The subject or subjects of the photographic coverage were broken down into these categories:
American soldiers, Coalition soldiers, Iraqi soldiers, Civilians (in the Middle East), Iraqi civilians,
American or Coalition weapons, equipment, or targets in Iraq, and Iraqi weapons, equipment, or targets in
Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait. These subject(s) were coded as being present, not present and weapons,
equipment or targets destroyed. American soldiers were present in 873 (47.1 percent) of the images. The
statistical difference in photographic coverage of American soldiers between the air and ground campaign
is shown in Table II.
61
TABLE II
AMERICAN SOLDIERS PRESENT OR NOT PRESENT IN PHOTOGRAPHIC IMAGES BETWEEN
THE AIR AND GROUND CAMPAIGN BY PERCENT
American soldiers present
American soldiers not present
Air Campaign
30.8
32.2
Ground Campaign
N=873
x2=4.17259, df=l, p<0.04108
16.3
20.7
There was a 1.1 percent difference between the number of American soldiers present in photographs when
compared to the Vietnam War.9 Only 71 (8.1 percent) of the War in the Gulfs photographs portrayed
American soldiers in "actual combat;" a majority of the photographs, 527 (60.4 percent), portrayed
American soldiers in a "combat-related" setting. "Non-combat" setting photographs accounted for 275
(31.5 percent) of the images that portrayed American soldiers.
Coalitions soldiers appeared in 200 (10.8 percent) of the 1853 photographs; in comparison, the
Vietnam War photographs showed 18.8 percent10 Very few War in the Gulf photographs, only 17 of 200,
showed both American and Coalition soldiers together. There was no statistical difference for the presence
or absence of Coalition soldiers between the air and ground campaign.
Iraqi soldiers were present in only 167 (9.0 percent) of the total images from the War in the Gulf.
Of these images, 76 (45.5 percent) portrayed Iraqi soldiers as prisoners of war. American soldiers appeared
in 30 of these images (18.0 percent) with Iraqi prisoners of war, and Americans were shown in more
photographs with Iraqi soldiers than with Coalition soldiers. Photographs of enemy soldiers appeared more
often during the War in the Gulf (9.0 percent) than during the Vietnam War (6.1 percent).11
"Civilians in the Middle East," who lived in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Israel, were presented in
9 The averaged number of American soldier present in photographs from the Vietnam War was 46
percent. An average was obtained from the following research studies: Niemeyer, 66; and Sherer,
"Vietnam War Photos and Public Opinion," 395.
10 "Allied soldiers" photographs, taken in Vietnam, were obtained from the following research studies:
Niemeyer, 66; and Sherer, "Vietnam War Photos and Public Opinion," 395.
11 "Enemy soldiers" photographs, taken in Vietnam, were obtained from the following research studies:
Niemeyer, 66; and Sherer, "Vietnam War Photos and Public Opinion," 395.
62
317 (17.1 percent) photographs. Only three images (0.9 percent) showed civilians in "actual combat"
scenes, and these images showed Israeli citizens during an Iraqi Scud missile attacked which occurred
during the Air Campaign. In 155 photographs (48.9 percent), civilians in the Middle East were shown in
"combat related" scenes. Photographs depicting "non-combat" settings accounted for 149 (50.2 percent) of
the images. Most of the "non-combat" photographs, 192 (60.6 percent), were published during the air
campaign.
Iraqi civilians were present in 113 (6.1 percent) of all photographs published during the War in the
Gulf. Only 3 (2.7 percent) of the 113 photographs portrayed Iraqi civilians in actual combat settings. One
image occurred during the Air Campaign and the other two images appeared during the Ground Campaign.
A majority of the images, 75 (66.4 percent), presented Iraqi civilians in "combat-related" scenes
specifically, civilians living in bombed out building and streets. The remaining images of Iraqi civilians, 35
(31 percent), showed "non-combat" settings.
Photographic coverage of civilians in the Middle East and Iraq was consistent with equivalent
photographic coverage of the Vietnam War. "Civilians in the Middle East" were present in 17.1 percent of
the War in the Gulf photographs as compared to 20.2 percent in Vietnam.12 Iraqi civilians were seen in 6.1
percent of the photographs of the war as compared to 5.6 percent of Enemy civilians during the Vietnam
War.13
The largest number of War in the Gulf photographs, 877 (47.3 percent), was of American or
Coalition weapons, equipment and targets in Iraq. This percentage diverged considerably from the 14.5
percent published during the Vietnam War.14 Only seven (0.4 percent) of the images during the War in the
Gulf showed destroyed weapons, equipment and targets. Of the 873 photographs of American soldiers
from the entire war, only 476 (54.5 percent) showed American soldiers present with American or Coalition
12Civilians in the Middle East were counted in the following countries: Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and
Israel. "Allied civilians" photographs, taken in Vietnam, were obtained from Niemeyer, 66.
13 "Enemy civilians" photographs, taken in Vietnam, were obtained from Niemeyer, 66.
14An average was obtained from the following research studies: Niemeyer, 66; and Sherer, "Vietnam
War Photos and Public Opinion," 395.
63
weapons, equipment or targets in Iraq.
Images of Iraqi weapons, equipment, or targets in Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait also appeared
in newspapers and newsmagazines. There were 215 of the photographs (11.6 percent) portrayed Iraqi
weapons, equipment, or targets present compared to the 6.6 percent during the Vietnam War.15 There were
more photographs, 65 (3.5 percent), of destroyed weapons, equipment or targets during the War in the Gulf.
Portrayal
Beside the subject(s) being coded as present or not in the published photograph, the photograph
was coded the way in which the primary subject was portrayed. Following previous research studies, the
author broke the portrayal area into 14 different categories.16 A majority, 478 (25.8 percent), of the 1,853
photographic images showed a "situation depicting soldiers in action, but not in combat." There was only
one (0.1 percent) image that portrayed an "immediate life-threatening situation with dead or wounded
present." It was published during the ground campaign and portrayed an American soldier. There were
1,167 photographs published during the air campaign and 686 during the ground campaign, and there was
no statistical significance of portrayal of the primary subject between the air and ground campaign (Table
III).
15 "Enemy weapons, equipment and targets" photographs taken in Vietnam, were obtained from
Niemeyer, 66.
16Portrayal was coded as: immediate life-threatening situation with dead or wounded present; immediate
life-threatening situation with no dead or wounded present; situation depicting combat-related discomfort or
fatigue; situation depicting soldier(s) resting and relaxing; situation depicting preparing equipment for war;
situation depicting soldier(s) in action, but not in combat; situation depicting civilians with dead or
wounded present; situation depicting civilians with no dead or wounded present; weapons, equipment or
targets shown in a state of destruction from combat; weapons, equipment or targets not shown in a state of
destruction from combat; American or Coalition Prisoners of War (POW); Iraqi POWs; situation depicting
wounded soldier(s); and situation depicting dead soldier(s).
64
TABLE III
PORTRAYAL OF PRIMARY SUBJECT IN PHOTOGRAPHS DURING THE WAR IN THE GULF BY
PERCENT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
0
6.5
0.3
7.8
6.7
17.4
1.7
7.6
9.1
1.5
3.1
0.1
0.1
1.2
Ground Campaign
0.1 3.7 0.2 4.1 0.9 8.4 0.7 6.6 5.5 1.2
N= 1,853
x2= l33.45660, df=13, p<0.00000
1= Immediate life-threatening situation with dead or wounded present.
2= Immediate life-threatening situation with no dead or wounded present.
3= Situation depicting combat-related discomfort or fatigue.
4= Situation depicting soldiers resting and relaxing.
5= Situation depicting preparing equipment for war.
6= Situation depicting soldiers in action, but not in combat.
7= Situation depicting civilians with dead or wounded present.
8 = Situation depicting civilians with no dead or wounded present.
9= Weapons, equipment or targets shown in a state of destruction from combat.
10= Weapons, equipment or targets not shown in a state of destruction from combat.
11= American or Coalition Prisoners of War (POW).
12= Situation depicting wounded soldier.
13= Situation depicting dead soldiers.
14= Iraqi POW.
1.2
0.9
0.6
2.9
Air Campaign
There are differences in some categories that must be noted when comparing the portrayal of the
primary subject during the War in the Gulf to the same portrayal during the Vietnam War. In the
"immediate life-threatening situation" category, 10.3 percent of the images from the War in the Gulf
portrayed the primary subject. In Vietnam, an average of 15.6 percent of the photographs portrayed the
primary subject in "immediate life-threatening situations."17
"Combat-related discomfort or fatigue" was shown in 0.5 percent of the photographs portraying
the primary subject during the War in the Gulf. An average 22.5 percent of the images portrayed "combatrelated discomfort or fatigue" during the Vietnam War.18 Only 19 (1.0 percent) of the War of the Gulf
17 "Immediate life threatening situations" photographs, taken in Vietnam, were averaged from the
following research studies: Niemeyer, 67; Sherer, "Comparing Magazine Photos of Vietnam and Korean
Wars," 756; and Sherer, "Vietnam War Photos and Public Opinion," 395. In the Niemeyer study, the
researcher broke this category into "immediate life threatening situations" with dead or wounded present or
with no dead or wounded present.
18 "Combat-related discomfort or fatigue" photographs, taken in Vietnam, were obtained from the
following research studies: Niemeyer, 67; and Sherer, "Vietnam War Photos and Public Opinion," 395.
The Niemeyer study broke this category into "combat-related discomfort or fatigue" with dead or wounded
65
photographs showed wounded soldiers compared with 14.9 percent for the Vietnam War.19
Only 14.6 percent of the photographs taken during the War in the Gulf portrayed subject(s) with
destroyed "weapons, equipment or targets;" during Vietnam, 6.3 percent portrayed destroyed "weapons,
equipment or targets."20 Many of these images included environmental targets; such as, oil spills, oil well
fires, and wildlife effected by environmental hazards. Of the photographs that portrayed subject(s) with
"weapons, equipment or targets" not destroyed, 2.7 percent of the these image appeared during the War in
the Gulf, and 7.6 percent during Vietnam.21
Perspective
Photographs of the primary subject(s) were portrayed in several perspectives during the War in the
Gulf. A majority (60.1 percent) of the images of subject(s) were shown in the "normal view of people or
objects which are identifiable." The statistical differences between the perspectives of the photographs of
subject(s) during the air and ground campaigns is shown in Table IV.
present or with no dead or wounded present.
19 "Dead/wounded soldiers" photographs, taken in Vietnam, were obtained from the following research
studies. Sherer, "Comparing Magazine Photos of Vietnam and Korean Wars," 756; and Kenrick S.
Thompson, and Alfred C. Clarke, "Photographic Imagery and the Vietnam War: An Unexamined
Perspective," The Journal of Psychology. 87 (1975): 283.
20 "Destroyed weapons, equipment or targets" photographs, taken in Vietnam, were obtained from the
following research studies: Niemeyer, 67; Sherer, "Comparing Magazine Photos of Vietnam and Korean
Wars," 756; and Sherer, "Vietnam War Photos and Public Opinion," 395.
21 Photographs portraying intact "weapons, equipment or targets" in Vietnam were obtained from the
following research studies: Niemeyer, 67; Sherer, "Comparing Magazine Photos of Vietnam and Korean
Wars," 756; and Sherer, "Vietnam War Photos and Public Opinion," 395.
66
TABLE IV
PERSPECTIVES OF SUBJECT(S) DURING THE WAR IN THE GULF BY PERCENT
Distant
Distant
CU which CU which Normal
Normal
view
view
view
view
are ident.
are not
ident.
which are which are which are whioh ore
ident.
not ident.
ident.
not ident.
Air Campaign
Blurred
image
7.3
0.5
34.8
4.8
8.1
4.9
2.6
2.9
Ground Campaign
N= 1,853
x2=37.62071, df=6, p<0.00000
0.2
25.4
1.9
3.8
2.3
0.5
American soldiers were present in 873 photographs and were portrayed from several perspectives
during the War in the Gulf. A majority (65.3 percent) of the images of American soldiers was shown in the
"normal view of people or objects which are identifiable." The "perspective" presentation of American
soldiers in photographic images was similar to the results found for the War in the Gulf.
With the exception, the primary scene and the portrayal of photographs taken during the War in
the Gulf, there were statistical differences in the areas of subject(s), and perspective of photographic images
between the air and ground campaign. Of the 1,853 published images, a majority (60.3 percent) were of
"combat related scenes," while 11.6 percent showed "actual combat scenes." Of the seven subjects that
*
were coded as present or not present, the largest number of photographs, 877 (47.3 percent), showed
American or Coalition weapons, equipment or targets in Iraq. The largest number of photographs with
soldiers present were of American soldiers (873 or 47.1 percent). The photographs that portrayed the
primary subjects showed a "situation depicting soldiers in action, but not in combat" 25.8 percent of the
time. Photographs published during the war showed different perspectives; of these 1,114 (60.1 percent)
showed the subject(s) in a "normal view of people or objects which are identifiable."
Photographic images from the War in the G uy compared to images from the Vietnam War
The Vietnam and Gulf wars were different. The Vietnam War was fought in the jungle with no
visible enemy and no clearly defined front lines. Images from the Tet Offensive of 1968 showed that safe
areas, including the American Embassy, were vulnerable to enemy attack. The War in the Gulf was fought
in the desert where national borders defined the battle lines until the ground campaign began. The lines
67
moved as quickly as the tanks advanced. The Vietnam War was fought during several presidential
administrations, while the War in the Gulf was fought solely under the Bush administration. The
photographic coverage of these two wars is also different.
Photojoumalists were allowed nearly open access to events with minimal censorship during the
Vietnam War. During the War in the Gulf, photojoumalists had limited access to the events of the war and
more strict guidelines on gathering photographic images. Access is a variable when photographic images
from the Vietnam War and the War in the Gulf are compared.
There was a difference in the presentation of the scene between the two wars. Photographs from
the War in the Gulf did not show the "actual combat" that the American public saw during the Vietnam
War. More photographs of "actual combat" (25.9 percent) were taken during the Vietnam War than during
the War in the Gulf (11.6 percent).22 In the category of "combat-related" photographs, 60.3 percent of these
images were published during the War in the Gulf compared to the 35.2 percent published from the
Vietnam War. During the War in the Gulf, 28.1 percent of the photographs were non-combat, and 38.9
percent for the Vietnam War images. There was statistical significance when comparing the scene of
photographic images between the War in the Gulf and the Vietnam War (Table V).
22An average of "actual combat" photographs taken in Vietnam was obtain from the following research
studies: Niemeyer, 64; Sherer, "Comparing Magazine Photos of Vietnam and Korean Wars," 755; and
Sherer, "Vietnam War Photos and Public Opinion," 395.
68
TABLE V
COMPARISON OF THE SCENE OF PHOTOGRAPHIC IMAGES BETWEEN THE WAR IN THE
GULF AND THE VIETNAM WAR BY PERCENT
War in the Gulf23
Vietnam War24
Actual combat setting
11.6
25.9
Combat-related setting
60.3
35.2
Non-combat scene
x2-5.7448, df=2, p<0.05
28.1
38.9
Photographic coverage of the Vietnam War presented more images depicting "immediate life
threatening situations," "combat-related discomfort or fatigue," "dead or wounded soldiers" and destroyed
"weapons, equipment or targets."25 One major difference between photographs of the War in the Gulf and
Vietnam War was the images of dead or wounded soldiers. During the War in the Gulf, there were no
photographs of dead American soldiers and only 1.9 percent of the images of wounded American soldiers
compared to the photographs of dead and wounded soldiers (14.9 percent) during the Vietnam War.26
A difference was noted when the perspectives of photographs between the War in the Gulf and the
Vietnam War were compared. To compare percentages between the two wars, the close-up, normal and
23 n= 1,853
24 An average of photographs taken in Vietnam was obtain from the following research studies:
Niemeyer, 1-71 and n=683 ; Sherer, "Comparing Magazine Photos of Vietnam and Korean Wars," 752-756
and n=148; Sherer, "Vietnam War Photos and Public Opinion," 391-395 and n=286; and Thompson and
Clarke, 279-292 and n=306.
25 In Vietnam, 15.6 percent of the photographs portrayed "immediate life-threatening situations"
compared to 8.0 percent during the War in the Gulf. "Combat-related discomfort or fatigue" was shown in
0.8 percent of the photographs portraying American soldiers during the War in the Gulf, while an average
22.5 percent of the Vietnam War images portrayed "combat-related discomfort or fatigue." During
Vietnam, 6.3 percent portrayed destroyed "weapons, equipment or targets," while only 3.6
percent of the War in the Gulf photographs portrayed Americans soldiers with destroyed "weapons,
equipment or targets." Percentages of photographs from the Vietnam War were collected from the
following studies: Charlotte Niemeyer, "Recording the Vietnam War: Photographic Coverage in
Newsmagazines from 1964 to 1973" (Masters' Thesis, University of Nebraska at Omaha, 1990), 67;
Michael D. Sherer, "Comparing Magazine Photos of Vietnam and Korean Wars," Journalism Quarterly. 65
(Fall 1988): 756; and Michael D. Sherer, "Vietnam War Photos and Public Opinion," Journalism Quarterly.
66 (Summer 1989): 395.
26 "Dead/wounded soldiers" photographs, taken in Vietnam, were obtained from the following research
studies: Sherer, "Comparing Magazine Photos of Vietnam and Korean Wars," 756; and Kenrick S.
Thompson, and Alfred C. Clarke, "Photographic Imagery and the Vietnam War: An Unexamined
Perspective," The Journal of Psychology. 87 (1975): 283.
69
distant views were combined to allow comparison with the Vietnam War. During the War in the Gulf, 11.0
percent of the photographs showed the close up perspective compared to 26.4 percent in Vietnam. Most
War in the Gulf photographs (66.8 percent) used a normal view perspective; this was much higher than the
Vietnam War (45.2 percent). More Vietnam War photographs were taken from a distant perspective (28.4
percent) compared to 19.1 percent taken during the War in the Gulf.27 There was also statistical
significance when comparing the perspective of subject(s) of images between the War in the Gulf and the
Vietnam War (Table VI).
TABLE VI
COMPARISON OF THE PERSPECTIVE OF SUBJECT(S) OF IMAGES BETWEEN THE WAR IN THE
GULF AND THE VIETNAM WAR BY PERCENT
War in the Gulf28
Vietnam War29
Close-up view
11.0
26.4
Normal view
66.8
45.2
Distant view
19.1
28.4
Blurred view
x2=7.3455, df=3, p<0.05
3.1
0.0
The overall image o f the War in the Gulf
The photographic analysis showed that a majority of War in the Gulf images (60.3 percent)
portrayed "combat-related" scenes, while only 11.6 percent showed "actual combat." Combat related
scenes portrayed pre/post-combat scenes or troop movements in combat areas but not actual combat. The
remaining 28.1 percent of the images portrayed non-combat scenes which were in areas of relative safety
(cities, headquarters, or other locations).
27 "Close-up," "Normal view," and "Distant view" perspective photographs, taken in Vietnam, were
obtained from the following research studies: Niemeyer, 68; and Sherer, "Vietnam War Photos and Public
Opinion," 395.
28n= 1,85 3
29 An average of photographs taken in Vietnam was obtain from the following research studies:
Niemeyer, 1-71 and n=683; and Sherer, "Vietnam War Photos and Public Opinion," 391-395.
70
Of the overall 1,853 images, 25.8 percent depicted soldiers in action but not in combat. Images
portraying life threatening situations with dead or wounded only accounted for only 0.1 percent of the total
photographs, while 10.2 percent of the images portrayed life threatening situations without dead or
wounded. There were only 32 images (1.7 percent) showing wounded or dead soldiers taken during the
War in the Gulf, and none of these images were of dead American soldiers.
American soldiers were present in 47.1 percent of the 1,853 images published during the War in
the Gulf. Only eight percent of 873 images showed American soldiers in "life threatening situations," and
only 0.1 percent showed dead or wounded. When American soldiers were in "life threatening situations,"
they could not be identified. Their faces were either unrecognizable or could not seen in the photograph.
American soldiers "resting and relaxing" account for 20.8 percent of the images while 13.8 percent showed
soldiers preparing equipment for combat. American soldiers were seen with Iraqi soldiers more often (3.1
percent) than with their Coalition counterparts (0.9); but 30 images (1.6 percent) showed Iraqi soldiers as
prisoners of war. American soldiers were seen in more normal perspective photographs (73.1 percent) than
in close-up (14.5 percent) or distant (12.0 percent) perspectives.
Images of civilians during the War in the Gulf were similar to those of civilians during the
Vietnam War. "Civilians in the Middle East" were present in 317 (17.1 percent) images from the War in
the Gulf compared to 20.2 percent of Allied civilians in Vietnam.30 Twenty-two of the 317 images showed
"civilians with dead or wounded," and 46 portrayed civilians with "weapons, equipment or targets shown in
a state of destruction" from Iraqi Scud missile attacks. A majority of these images were taken after Iraqi
Scud attacks in Israel. Since Israel was not a Coalition member, photojoumalists were able to capture the
real events of the war such as Scud missiles exploding.
Iraqi civilians appeared in 113 (6.1 percent) images during the War in the Gulf. This was similar
to the 5.6 percent of enemy civilian photographs taken during the Vietnam War.31 Only 20 photographs
depicted Iraqi civilians with dead or wounded present. Most of the images of dead Iraqi civilians occurred
30 Civilians in the Middle East were counted in the following countries: Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and
Israel. "Allied civilians" photographs, taken in Vietnam, were obtained from Niemeyer, 66.
31 "Enemy civilians" photographs, taken in Vietnam, were obtained from Niemeyer, 66.
71
after bombs destroyed a shelter in Baghdad. These images were used by Iraq in an attempt to sway
American and Coalition public opinion. Photojoumalists and journalists in Iraq who covered this event
where allowed open access with no official censorship.
Summary
Photojoumalists who covered the War in the Gulf found themselves with limited access to the
events of the war, plus guidelines and security reviews placed on them by the military. The overall image
of this war was constructed as a high-tech, mobile operation that placed no American soldiers in any actual
danger. Overall, the War in the Gulf photographs presented an image similar to a high-tech Nintendo
game, but one that could not be turned off with a simple power switch.
War has deadly stakes that place people and machines in harm's way. Soldiers do die and bombs
do kill people, but images from the War in the Gulf did not show the reality of war that was shown during
the Vietnam War. The photographic coverage of the War in the Gulf differed from the Vietnam War in
many ways.
Chapter V
Conclusion
War is not only a part of American history, it is the final step or part of American foreign policy.
Wars have become more high-tech, and, so has media coverage. During the Civil War, photographs were
not published directly. The images were used as a models for the line drawings used in Civil War era
publications. During the War in the Gulf, satellite communications made near real time coverage of the war
possible. Photographic coverage has evolved from the posed Civil War images of soldiers and the
aftermath of battle to capturing the split seconds images of actual combat with photographs during the War
in the Gulf.
Military and political leaders placed limitation on the number of journalists allowed to cover the
war from the battle zone because of the media's ability to cover war in near real time. This allows for a
security review of their products. In the age of real time television wars, the combat photojournalism of
World War II, the Korean War and the Vietnam War is over. The unescorted photojoumalists, who once
accompanied soldiers on World War II invasion landings and into Vietnamese landing zones, have been
placed in military escorted journalistic pools. The military provides them with an official version of the
war. This is the age of a military/political constructed reality of war.
Access and Photographic Coverage o f the War in the Gulf
When the small number of "actual combat" (11.6 percent) photographs is compared to the large
number of "combat-related" (60.3 percent) and "non-combat" (28.1 percent) photographs, we can see that
access to the battle areas was a determining factor in the photojoumalistic recording of War in the Gulf.
Images of life threatening situations and dead or wounded soldiers can only be taken if a photojoumalist is
present during the battle. Only 190 (of 1,853) photographic images published during the War in the Gulf
depicted "life threatening situations," and 70 (3.8 percent) of those images showed American soldiers
present in "life threatening situations." During the Vietnam War, with practically open media access, 15.6
73
percent of the photographs portrayed "life-threatening situations."1
Images of dead and wounded soldiers accounted for only 1.7 percent of the total images published
during the War in the Gulf. This percentage, compared to the 14.9 percent during the Vietnam War, shows
a significant difference in the portrayal of dead and wounded between the two wars.2 When access is
limited, photojoumalists can not capture the violent, life-threatening nature of war. In the battle zone,
soldiers are shot and soldiers die. Only 13 images of dead Iraqi soldiers were published during the War in
the Gulf. There were no images of dead American soldiers.
Before the War in the Gulf even started, there were over 100 American causalities caused by
accidents. The military occasionally released a running tally of the American soldiers who died during the
war.3 The true image of coffins coming home from the war zone was hidden because Dover Air Force
Base, the military's main mortuary and receiving point for bodies, was closed to the media and to the
public.
Conclusion
Public opinion during the War in the Gulf was very favorable and continued to grow throughout
the war. The American public followed the news closely and believed the media was doing a good job
covering the war.4 With limited access to the real war and a security review of all media products during
the war, the military was able to construct a high-tech mobile image of war with smart bombs and laser
guided tank weapons always hitting their targets. The smart bombs image was played in military briefings,
1"Immediate life threatening situations" photographs, taken in Vietnam were obtained from the
following research studies: Niemeyer, 67; Sherer, "Comparing Magazine Photos of Vietnam and Korean
Wars," 756; and Sherer, "Vietnam War Photos and Public Opinion," 395. The Niemeyer study broke this
category into "immediate life threatening situations" with dead or wounded present or with no dead or
wounded present.
2 "Dead/wounded soldiers" photographs, taken in Vietnam, were obtained from the following research
studies: Sherer, "Comparing Magazine Photos of Vietnam and Korean Wars," 756; and Kenrick S.
Thompson, and Alfred C. Clarke, "Photographic Imagery and the Vietnam War: An Unexamined
Perspective," The Journal of Psychology. 87 (1975): 283.
3Douglas Kellner, The Persian Gulf TV War (Boulder: Westview Press, 1992) 197.
4 The People, the Press and the War in the Gulf: A Special Times Mirror News Interest Index
(Washington D C.: Times Mirror Center for the People and the Press, 31 January 1991): 8.
74
replayed on the evening news, and published in newspapers and magazines. This image, a product of the
military not the media, was loved by both the public and the media.
The military constructed the conditions under which the media would cover the War in the Gulf.
If the media wanted to cover one of the biggest stories in the decade, adherence to the military ground rules
was a must. The military limited photojoumalist access by using a pool system which allowed only a
handful of journalists to cover the war with the active military units. The remaining journalists covered the
war from a safe rear area. The system allowed a few photojoumalists into the field to cover the war while
hundreds covered each step taken by the military.
During the War in the Gulf, the military launched thousands of bombing sorties against Iraq and
Iraqi positions in Kuwait, more than any other war in American history. Robert Schnitzlein, a Reuters
photo editor, said, "There is really no photographic document of actual fighting in the Gulf. "5 Michael
Getler, foreign-news editor for The Washington Post, agreed:
The war had the largest armored movement in history, and essentially no one saw it.
There are no pictures of it. There's nothing. I guess it was all dust-covered anyway, but
there's nothing to record this.6
In this age of real time television coverage of wars and conflicts, political and military leaders
have learned that fighting lengthy wars is nearly impossible for a democratic society. From the first
bombing attacks of Iraq to the Iraqi accepted cease fire, the War in the Gulf lasted 48 days. The overall
image of the War in the Gulf was portrayed as a high-tech, mobile operation that placed no American
soldiers in any actual danger. The images of war have given us a visual description that a battle has taken
place, but our perceptions of war have been molded around our recent encounter with the War in the Gulf.
The contest of war has deadly stakes that place people and machines in harm's way. Soldiers do die and
bombs do kill people. Images from the War in the Gulf did not show the reality of war that was shown
during World War II, the Korean War and especially during the Vietnam War.
The Future o f Photographic Images in the "Real Time" Media World
5Kellner, 155.
6 John R. MacArthur, Second Front: Censorship and Propaganda in the Gulf War (New York: Hill and
Hang, 1992) 159.
75
During the War in the Gulf, the American public was entranced with the "real time" war-news
coverage. News junkies could watch CNN—24 hours-a-day for the latest developments. Even though
television was the mainstream source of news and information, the American public still turned to
newspapers and magazines for war information, and photographic images were still on the printed page for
people to view.
The photographic image will always have a place in the "real time" media world. Cameras, film
stocks, darkrooms and printing processes continue to evolve with other technological advances. The
photographic images will always remain as frozen moments in time. A photographic image on a printed
page was placed there for its newsworthiness and its attention attracting value. Many newspaper stories use
banner headlines and large colorful photographs to tell the American public that something happened in the
world. Newspapers and magazines of the future will be in a different format via computer via on-line
services, and photographs will still be an important part of the medium.
During the fiftieth anniversary celebration of the end of World War II, photographic images of the
war are being republished along with veterans' accounts of the war. Historical war photographs are
frequently resurrected from newspapers and magazines' photo files. War images are a part of our culture
and our collective consciousness. Americans will always remember the photographs of Marines raising the
American flag on Iwo Jima during World War II; of a naked Vietnamese girl running down a road after her
village was napalmed; and the targeting cross hairs placed precisely on a Iraqi target before it was
destroyed. These photographs were the news of their day; they now remind us that these events actually
happened.
When the space shuttle Challenger exploded in 1986, the world watch and rewatched videotapes
of the event. The photographic image of the fireball and the smoke in the sky gave us an image to
remember. After the federal building in Oklahoma City was bombed, the photographic image of a fireman
handing a limp child to a paramedic captured America's front pages and the heartfelt sorrow of a nation.
The photographic images captured the events and it left us with permanent moments etched in time.
Wars and disasters have brought our nation together and tom it apart. Photographs rallied support
for wars and disaster victims, and drove public opinion against military involvement in Somalia.
76
Photographs are not colorful filler, they are a powerful part of a medium that communicates in visual and
nonverbal terms. Researchers have not yet explored the sustaining nature of photographic images.
Future Research
Research will be needed in the area of military controls to the media's access to battles areas
during times of war. Other research should examine photographic images for propaganda to build or
destroy public support for military actions. As women's combat role becomes more active, the
photographic coverage of their role or roles should be studied. This author believes that the examination of
future combat photographs should be redefine the portrayal category to fit the particular situations of the
photographs in the context of the conflict in question. This thesis adjusted this category to fit the situations
of the War in the Gulf.
Appendix 1
Instruction fo r Coders
You will be coding photographic images from the War in the Gulf taken in the war theater region
of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iraq and Israel. Randomly selected issues between January 14, 1991, and March
18, 1991 from three national magazines: Time. Newsweek and U.S. News and World Report: and the three
top circulation daily newspapers: New York Times. Los Angeles Times and The Washington Post will be
used for coding.
When coding, look at the photographic image and at the cutline or caption. The outline will
indicate certain information needed for coding. Photographic images that are formal portraits of military
and government leaders, file photos, file photos of military equipment and facilities will be omitted from
the study. The exception to formal portraits taken in content of the conflict will be coded for the study.
During the training session, the author will explain the coding sheet key and the coding sheet. A
magazine will be used in training of the coders to demonstrate the process of coding. Your coding will be
used to determine intercoder reliability. There are no right or wrong answer. Code the images the way you
see it. Once again, thank you very much.
78
Coding Sheet Key
Scene—the moment captured in the image will be coded as:
1. Actual combat setting with troops under fire and/or military equipment in action.
2. Combat-related setting, pre/post-combat scene or troop movements in combat areas, but not
actually in combat when the photo was taken.
3. Non-combat scene, out of the field of combat, in areas of relative safety such as cities,
headquarters, or other locations.
Subject—these subjects of the picture will be coded as being present or not: (l=Present, 2=Not present and
3=Destroyed equipment, weapons or targets only for category 6 and 7)
1. American soldiers.
2. Coalition soldiers.
3. Iraqi soldiers.
4. Civilians (in the Middle East).
5. Enemy civilians.
6. American or Coalition weapons, equipment, or targets in Iraq.
7. Iraqi weapons, equipment, or targets in Isreal, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait.
Portrayal—the way in which the primary subject was portrayed will be coded as:
1. Immediate life-threatening situation with dead or wounded present.
2. Immediate life-threatening situation with no dead or wounded present.
3. Situation depicting combat-related discomfort or fatigue.
4. Situation depicting soldier resting and relaxing.
5. Situation depicting preparing equipment for war.
6. Situation depicting soldier in action, but not in combat.
7. Situation depicting civilian with dead or wounded present.
8. Situation depicting civilian with no dead or wounded present.
9. Weapons, equipment or targets shown in a state of destruction from combat.
10. Weapons, equipment or targets not shown in a state of destruction from combat.
11. American or Coalition Prisoners of War (POW).
12. Situation depicting wounded soldier.
13. Situation depicting dead soldiers.
14. Iraqi POW.
Perspective—the way in which the photograph captured the situation will be coded as:
1. Close-up, small number of people or objects which are identifiable.
2. Close-up, small number of people or objects which are not identifiable.
3. Normal view of people or objects which are identifiable.
4. Normal view of people or objects which are not identifiable.
5. Distant view of people or objects which are identifiable.
6. Distant view of people or objects which are not identifiable.
7. Blurred image.
Publication1. New York Times
2. Los Angeles Times
3. Washington Post
4. Time
5. Newsweek
6. U.S. News
DateIndicate date
79
Coding Sheet
Scene
A&C: Enemy
Amer. Coal.
Iraqi Civil, Enemy
WE& WE&
Soldier Soldier Soldier in ME Civil.
T
T
Port.
Persp.
Publ.
Page______ of
Date
Appendix 2
Intercoder Reliability
The author and two other coders coded randomly selected subsets of images from magazine and
newspaper issues to establish intercoder reliability for this study.1 Following Krippendorffs lowest
standard recommendation, intercoder reliability level will be established at 0.67.2 The reliability will be
evaluated by using a method explained by Holsti:
Coefficient of reliability =
2M_____
Nj + N2
In this formula, M represents the number of coding agreements, while Nj and N2represents the number of
decisions made by each coder.3
Intercoder reliability results for the following catergories are:
Scene =
2 (57^
72 + 72
= 0.79
American soldiers
= ____ 2 (70)_____ = 0.97
72 + 72
Coalition soldiers
= ____ 2
72 + 72
(55)
= 0.76
1One of the coders was a male graduate student in the Communication department, who has recently
finished his thesis. The other coder was a female, a former research assistant at the Univesity of NebraskaLincoln who is a veterinarian.
2Krippendorff, 147.
3 Ole R. Holsti, Content Analysis for the Social Sciences and Humanities (Reading: Addison-Wesley,
1969), 140; and Richard W. Budd, Robert K. Thorp, and Lewis Donohew, Content Analysis of
Communications (New York: Macmillan Company, 1967), 68.
81
Iraqi soldiers
= ____ 2_1651_____ = 0.90
72 + 72
Civilians in ME4
=
Iraqi Civilians
= ____ 2_(681_____ = 0.94
72 + 72
American WET5
=
2 (63)_____ = 0.88
72 + 72
2(49)
= 0.68
72 + 72
Iraqi WET6
=
2(63)
=0.88
72 + 72
Portrayal
=
2
72 + 72
= 0.76
Perspective
= _____ 2 (661_____ = 0.92
72 + 72
4 Civilians (in the Middle East).
5American or Coalition weapons, equipment or targets in Iraq.
6 Iraqi weapons, equipment, or targets in Isreal, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait.
Bibliography
Gale's Directory of Publication and Broadcast Media. Detroit: Gale Research Inc., 1994.
Editor and Publisher International Yearbook. New York City: Editor and Publisher, 1994.
"Experts from the Defendant's (Pentagon) Lawsuit Brief." In The Media and The Gulf War, ed. by
Hedrick Smith, 394-402. Washington, D.C., Seven Locks Press, 1992.
"Excerpts form the Plaintiffs (Press) Lawsuit Brief." In The Media and The Gulf War, ed. by Hedrick
Smith, 391-393. Washington, D.C., Seven Locks Press, 1992.
"Freedom of the Press is a Fundamental Right and There is a Presumption Against a Prior Restraint of
the Press." In The Media and The Gulf War, ed. by Hedrick Smith, 416-419. Washington, D. C.:
Seven Locks Press, 1992.
"Operation Desert Shield Ground Rules and Supplementary Guidelines." In The Media at War: The
Press and the Persian Gulf Conflict. 99. New York City: A Gannett Foundation Report, 1991.
The People, the Press and the War in the Gulf: A Special Times Mirror News Interest Index. Washington
D.C.: Times Mirror Center for the People and the Press, 31 January 1991.
Accord, Cafeteria Workers v. McElroy. 367 U.S. 886. 1961.
Baer, Walter S. Technology's Challenges to the First Amendment. San Monica: RAND, 1992.
Banta, Melissa, and Curtis M. Hinsley. From Site to Sight: Anthropology. Photography, and the Power
of Imagery. Cambridge: Peabody Museum Press, 1986.
Barnes, Barry. The Nature of Power. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1988.
Barthes, Roland. "The Photographic Message," Image-Music-Text. Translated and edited by Stephen
Heath. New York: Hill and Wang, 1977.
Bellando, Edourado. War Coverage: The Case of the Falklands. From the Freedom of Information
Center Report #494, 1984, ERIC ED 246 470.
Berelson, Bernard. Content Analysis in Communication Research. New York: The Free Press, 1952.
Berger, Peter L., and Luckmann, Thomas. The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology
of Knowledge. New York: Doubleday and Company, Inc., 1966.
Blackwood, Roy E. "The Content of News Photos: Roles Portrayed by Men and Women." Journalism
Quarterly. 60 (Winter 1983): 710-714.
Branzburg v. Hayes. 408 U.S. 665. 1972.
83
Budd, Richard W., Robert K. Thorp, and Lewis Donohew, Content Analysis of Communications. New
York: Macmillan Company, 1967.
Cheney, Dick. "Statement to the Press." In The Media and The Gulf War, ed. Hedrick Smith. 27-28.
Washington, D.C.: Seven Locks Press, 1992.
Cohen, Akiba A., Hanna Adoni, and Charles R. Bantz. Social Conflict and Television News. Newbury
Park: Sage Publications, 1990.
Collier Jr., John, and Malcolm Collier. Visual Anthropology: Photography as a Research Method.
Revised and Expanded Edition. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1986.
Cronkite, Walter. "What is There to Hide?" In The Media and The Gulf War, ed. by Hedrick Smith,
45-47. Washington, D.C. : Seven Locks Press, 1992.
Demac, Donna A. Liberty Denied: The Current Rise of Censorship in America. New York: PEN
American Center, 1988.
DeParle, Jason. "Keeping the News in Step: Are Pentagon Rules Here to Stay?" In The Media and
The Gulf War, ed. by Hedrick Smith, 385-390. Washington, D.C.: Seven Locks Press, 1992.
Dow, Caroline. "Prior Restraint on Photojoumalists." Journalism Quarterly. 64 (Spring 1987): 88-93.
Dykhouse, Caroline Dow. "Shuttered Shutters: The Photographic Statues and Their Faithful Companion,
18 USC 1382- An Examination of Photographic Access to Military Areas." 1982, ERIC, ED 218
678.
Edom, Clifton. "Photo-propaganda: The History of Its Development." Journalism Quarterly. 24 (Spring
1947): 221-226.
Fialka, John J. Hotel Warriors: Covering the Gulf War. Washington D.C.: The Woodrow Wilson
Center Press, 1991.
Fosdick, James A. "Photography in War and Peace." Journalism Quarterly. 24 (Spring 1947): 227-232.
Fosdick, James. "Picture Content and Source in Four Daily Newspapers." Journalism Quarterly. 46
(Summer 1969): 368-371.
Gans, Hebert J. Deciding What's News: A Study of CBS Evening News. NBC Nightly News. Newsweek,
and Time. New York: Vintage Books, 1979.
Geraci, Phillip C. "Newspaper Illustration and Readership: Is USA Today on Target?" Journalism
Quarterly. 61 (Summer 1984): 409-413.
Gerbner, George. "Persian Gulf War, the Movie." In Triumph of the Image: The Media's War in the
Persian Gulf-A Global Perspective, ed. by Hamid Mowlana, George Gerbner, and Herbert I.
Schiller, 243-265, Boulder: Westview Press, 1992.
Globe Newspaper Co. v. Superior Court. 457 U.S. 596. 1982.
Gottschalk, Jack A. '"Consistent with Security'... A History of American Military Press Censorship."
Communications and the Law. (Summer 1983): 35-52.
84
Graber, Doris A. Mass Media and American Politics. Washington, D.C.: CQ Press, 1989.
Greer v. Spock. 428 U.S. 828. 1976.
Hall, Stuart. "The determinations of news photographs." In The manufacture of news: Deviance, social
problems, and the Media, ed: Stanley Cohen and Jock Young, 226-243 . Beverly Hills: Sage
Publication, 1981.
Holsti, Ole R. Content Analysis for the Social Sciences and Humanities. Reading: Addison-Wesley,
1969.
Houchins v. KQED. 438 U.S. 1. 1978.
Kellner, Douglas. The Persian Gulf TV War. Boulder: Westview Press, 1992.
Knightley, Phillip. The First Casualty. New York: Harcourt, Brace Jovanovich, 1975.
Korbe, Ken, Sidney Korbe, and Betsy Brill. Spanish-American War "You Furnish the Pictures. I'll
Furnish the War." From Proceedings of the 72nd Annual Meeting of the Association for
Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Washington, D.C., 10-13 August 1989, ERIC,
ED 310 459.
Krippendorff, Klaus. Content Analysis: An Introduction to its Methodology. Beverly Hills: Sage
Publication, Inc., 1980.
Lang, Gladys Engel, and Kurt Lang. Politics and Television: Re-viewed. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications,
1984.
Leif, Louise, and Bruce B. Auster with Todd Shields and Sam Kiley, "What went wrong in Somalia?"
U.S. News and World Reports. 18 October 1994, 33-37.
Leslie, Larry. "Newspaper Photo Coverage of Censure of McCarthy." Journalism Quarterly. 63 (Winter
1983): 850-853.
Lichter, Robert. "The Instant Replay War." In The Media and The Gulf War, ed. by Hedrick Smith,
224-229. Washington, D.C.: Seven Locks Press, 1992.
Lule, Jack. Enduring Image of War: Analysis of a Newsweek Cover. From Proceedings of the 74th
Annual Meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication,
Boston, Massachusetts, 7-10 August 1991, ERIC ED 336 795.
MacArthur, John R. Second Front: Censorship and Propaganda in the Gulf War. New York City: Hill
and Wang, 1992.
Marder, Murrey. "Operation Washington Shield." Nieman Reports. 45:2 (Summer 1991): 3-9.
McMasters, Paul. "The Pentagon and the Press: The War Continues." Newspaper Research Journal.
12:1 (Winter 1991): 2-10.
Mercer, Derrick, Geoff Mungham, and Kevin Williams. The Fog of War: The Media on the Battlefield.
London: Heinemann, 1987.
85
Mich, Daniel D. "The Rise of Photo-Journalism in the United States." Journalism Quarterly, 24
(September 1947): 202-206.
Miller, Susan. "The Content of News Photos: Women's and Men's Roles." Journalism Quarterly, 52
(Spring 1975): 70-75.
Moeller, Susan. Shooting War. New York: Basic Books, Inc., 1989.
Moriaty, Sandra E. and Mary N. Popovich. "Newsmagazine Visuals and the 1988 Presidential Election."
Journalism Quarterly. 68 (Fall 1991): 371-380.
Morris, John G. "This We Remember: Have Photographers Brought Home the Reality." Harper's
Magazine. September 1972: 72-78.
New York Times v. U.S. 403 U.S. 713. 1971.
Newhagen, John E. "The Relationship Between Censorship and the Emotional and Critical Tone of
Television News Coverage of the Persian Gulf War." Journalism Quarterly. 71 (Spring 1991): 3242.
Niemeyer, Charlotte. "Recording the Vietnam War: Photographic Coverage in Newsmagazines from
1964 to 1973." Masters' Thesis, University of Nebraska at Omaha, 1990.
Norstedt, Stig A. "Ruling by Pooling." In Triumph of the Image: The Media's War in the Persian Gulf-A
Global Perspective, ed. by Hamid Mowlana, George Gerbner, and Herbert I. Schiller, 118-127.
Boulder: Westview Press, 1992.
Ottosen, Rune. "Truth: The First Victim of War?" In Triumph of the Image: The Media's War in the
Persian Gulf-A Global Perspective, ed. by Hamid Mowlana, George Gerbner, and Herbert I.
Schiller, 137-143. Boulder: Westview Press, 1992.
Patterson, Oscar, III. "Television's Living Room War in Print: Vietnam in the News Magazines.
"Journalism Quarterly. 61 (Spring 1984): 35-39.
Pavlik, John and Seth Rachlin. "On Assignment: A Survey of Journalists Who Covered the War." In
The Media at War: The Press and the Persian Gulf Conflict. New York City: A Gannett
Foundation Report, June 1991,26-33.
Pearson, Andrea G. "Frank Leslie's Illustrated Newspaper and Harper's Weekly: Innovation and Imitation
in Nineteenth-Century American Pictorial Reporting." Journal of Popular Culture 23 (Spring
1990): 81-111.
Procunier v. Pell. 417 U.S. 817. 1974.
Richmond Newspaper, Inc. v. Virginia. 448 U.S. 555. 1980.
Sand, Judge Leonard B., U.S.D.J. "Excerpts from the Court Opinion." In The Media and The Gulf
War, ed. by Hedrick Smith, 403-415. Washington, D.C.: Seven Locks Press, 1992.
Saxbe v. Washington Post. 417 U.S. 843. 1974.
86
Schanberg, Sydney H. "Censoring for (Military) Political Security." Washington Journalism Review.
13, March 1991,23-26.
Schanberg, Sydney H.. "Censoring for Political Security." In The Media and The Gulf War, ed. by
Hedrick Smith, 48-58. Washington, D.C.: Seven Locks Press, 1992.
Sharkey, Jacqueline. "When Pictures Drive Foreign Policy." American Journalism Review, December
1993, 14-19.
Sherer, Michael D. "Invasion of Poland Photos in Four American Newspapers." Journalism Quarterly,
61 (Summer 1984): 422-426.
Sherer, Michael D. "Comparing Magazine Photos of Vietnam and Korean War." Journalism Quarterly,
65:3 (Fall 1988): 752-756.
Sherer, Michael D. "Vietnam War Photos and Public Opinion." Journalism Quarterly. 66 (Summer
1989): 391-395.
Sia, Richard H.P. Interview by Victor J. Paul, 20 June 1994, Compu Serve Forum.
Singletary, Michael. "Newspaper Photographs: A Content Analysis 1936-1976." Journalism Quarterly,
55 (Autumn 1978): 585-589.
Singletary, Michael and Chris Lamb. "News Value in Award Winning Photos." Journalism Quarterly,
61 (Spring 1984): 104-108.
Smith, Major General Perry M. How CNN Fought the War. New York City: A Birch Lane Press Book,
1991.
Smolla, Rodney A. Free Speech in an Open Society. New York: Vintage Books, 1992.
Sparks, Glen G. and Christine L. Fehlner. "Faces in the News: Gender Comparisons of Magazine
Photographs." Journal of Communication. 36, (Autumn 1986): 70-79.
Sparrow, Major General Herbert, U.S. Army (retired). "The Military Versus the Media." In The Media
and The Gulf War, ed. by Hedrick Smith, 63-68. Washington, D.C.: Seven Locks Press, 1992.
Stempel, Guido H. "Visibility of Blacks in News and News-Picture Magazine." Journalism Quarterly,
48 (Summer 1971): 337-339.
Stempel, Giodo H. "Content Analysis." Chap. in Research Methods in Mass Communication. 2d Ed.,
ed. Giodo H. Stempel, and Bruce H. Westley, 124-136. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall, 1989.
Stebenne, David. "The Military and the Media: The Gulf Conflict in Historical Perspective." In The
Media at War: The Press and the Persian Gulf Conflict. New York City: A Report of the Gannett
Foundation, June 1991, 8-25 .
Taylor, Philip M. War and the Media: Propaganda and Persuasion in the Gulf War. Manchester:
Manchester University Press, 1992.
Thompson, Kenrick S. and Alfred C. Clarke. "Photographic Imagery and the Vietnam War: An
Unexamined Perspective." Journal of Psychology. 87 (1974): 279-292.
87
Thompson, Kenrick S., Alfred C. Clarke, and Simon Dintz, "Reaction to My-Lai: A Visual-Verbal."
Sociology and Social Research. 58 19741: 122-129.
(
Trayer, Edward and Bruce Cook. "Picture Emphasis in Final Editions of 16 Dailies." Journalism
Quarterly. 54 (Autumn 1977): 595-599.
Tsang, Kuo-jen. "News Photos in Time and Newsweek." Journalism Quarterly. 61 (Autumn 1984):
578-584.
Tumly, David. "What Really Happens in War." Parade, in Omaha World-Herald. 9 June 1991, 4-6.
Umberson, Debra, and Kristin Henderson. "The Social Construction of Death in the Gulf War," OmegaJoumal of Death and Dying. 25:1 (1992): 1-15.
Volpe, Nicole. "How to Win." Village Voice. 26 March 1991, 17-18.
Williams, Pete. "Statement Before the U.S. Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs." In The
Media and The Gulf War, ed. by Hedrick Smith, 33-44. Washington, D.C.: Seven Locks Press,
1992.
White, Jon. Public Relations in the Social Construction of Reality: Theoretical and Practical Implications
of Berger and Luckmann's View of the Social Construction of Reality. From the paper presented
at the 70th Annual Meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass
Communication, San Antonio, Texas, 1-4 August 1987, ERIC, ED 285 189.
Zemelv. Rusk. 381 U.S. 1. 1965.
Zoglin, Richard. "It Was a Public Relations Rout Too." Time. 11 March 1991, 56-57.
Zorthian, Barry. "Statement Before the U.S. Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs." In The
Media and The Gulf War, ed. by Hedrick Smith, 101-104. Washington, D.C.: Seven Locks Press,
1992.